"Klingon D-18 Destroyer in Starline 2500 scale" Topic

My experiments in Art of Illusion continue. Here's another FASA classic starship re-imagined; the Klingon D-18 'Gull' class Destroyer

Changes from the original:

I scrapped the 'advanced' command pod, replacing it with something more 'speedy' in appearance, and more in line with the D7 pod. I might do an 'advanced' pod later, but I wanted this ship to look more like a TOS era vessel.

Impulse engines have split, now occupying 'underarm' positions beneath the wings, to improve manoeuvrability.

And lastly, the warp nacelles are forward of the main hull, so they can interact without frying the crew! Although the foremost rooms in the hull might get a little toasty…

This will be a three part kit (boom and pod, main hull, wings and hull topside) 60mm long.

Only problem is deciding just where to place the hole for the flight peg… being a resin casting, the weight shouldn't be too much trouble, but the engines are further forward than on the original FASA mini, and I think the location will be in the back of that skinny boom… I don't much like that.

Any thoughts, fellow space gamers?

Overall, I do like this redesign though I would prefer a command pod that didn't look so much like a D-7. I can see the difference between your pod and a D-7 so I do commend the attempt at a custom pod. I agree it makes it look more TOS but it also pushes it in the more "kitbashy" area as opposed to something wholly new.

Perhaps you might develop your own advanced command pod?

Excellent work and keep it up.

-Eli

Oh and on the point of the flight peg, FASA put it in the very bottom of the secondary hull.

-Eli

I love it. A far superior design to the original, which was a ship I never cared for – until now.

Thanks for the comments so far, folks!

Eli – It's funny, I was watching an episode of the Youtube show 'Trekyards' just two days ago, and one of the hosts described a fan-designed model as a 'kitbash'. Being a model builder myself, this offended me greatly, because THIS:

- is no mere 'kitbash'! :D

I mean, there isn't a single Tamiya Tiger I roadwheel anywhere to be seen…

(Bill Krause is the artist, btw; Google his other ships. They are glorious.)

But I think I know what you mean by your use of the phrase; Something that looks like its pinched pre-existing components and tied them together with some common connector /hull.

I do believe there are a lot of lazy kitbashes out there in the Trekverse, such as the Saladin class, but I also believe that ship design in Star Trek – at least, during Kirk's era – has a genuine modularity to it.

Klingon ships, for example, do all have similar warp nacelles, usually underhung, and a command pod made of interconnecting spheres and domes on the end of a long boom. That's their design philosophy carrying a constant theme across their products. If that means there's only so many combinations of these common components possible, then so be it.

I just don't like the plainness of the 'actual' D18's pod. It seems to lack in, well, Klingony-ness! However, I was conscious of the need to avoid 'just' taking a pre-existing pod, and skewering it on the end of the D18's neck.

As you can see here, my designs for the D18 and the D10's pods are quite different. In fact, they share no common parts at all:

Just for those unfamiliar with the original mini, here's a pic I found from someone's blog (apologies to the blogger, I've forgotten where I found this):

I have a FASA D18 somewhere, but do you think I can find it…? :(

Anyway, regarding the flight peg – I know it goes in the main hull on the FASA mini; my angst is caused by the fact I cannot measure the balance of mass on this digital re-design. Should I 'drill it' in the same place as on the FASA mini? Or have the forward-placed engines shifted the placement into the base of the boom?

Here's a conundrum unique to digital modelling – If I were building this from Milliput and styrene sheet, I'd have my answer already!! :D

Nice work! I liked the FASA D18 design but it's command pod didn't seem right somehow. I am now liking your D7-ish approach. Perhaps make it a bit smaller?

Anyway, keep us informed!

Cheers, RC.

MacrossMartin – I am glad you caught my meaning. It is clear that you have done a lot of excellent work on your designs and they are all good.

I wonder if the D-18 might work with a bridge modeled more after something like a bird of prey or D-5

This would allow it to have a distinct bridge design without evoking the D-7. If you stick with the classic Klingon command pod then you have already won that design process.

Really, I do like it as you have done it. As a fan of the original and somebody who likes to tinker with ship designs (though old school pen and paper) I was really more trying to offer some alternate views.

I do hope I haven't wrinkled you the wrong way on this or other feedback. It's excellent work and I do hope you will make them available in FASA scale.

-Eli

Eli – On the contrary, your views and opinions are highly valued. We might differ in the tools we use, or our design philosophies, or even shoelace colour, but I would never dismiss your input or your criticism.

No disrespect to those good members who express simple statements such as "I like it!" or "That's great!" – their feedback is also appreciated – but as any artist (however bad, like me,) knows, its the viewer who tilts their head, squints, and says "Hmm… maybe if you did this instead…" who makes you step back from your work, and see it from another angle – possibly catching a glaring mistake, or a much needed improvement in the process.

So, thanks for the head-tilting and squinting!!

As for using a pod based on that of another ship, such as the D5 – I probably won't, because I'm pretty happy with this one. It took a couple of goes to obtain the shapes and forms it has, after stubbornly refusing to look right on the first couple of passes. Sometimes you've just got to say "Right! That will do! On to the next bit…"

But – that doesn't mean there's no value in further experimentation. The Bird of Prey's pod might be a very suitable starting point for a later-model pod, given this D18 predates the BoP by about 15 years or so. Out with the sketchbook and graphite… ;)

Regarding scale – Am I the only one with Starline 2500 fleets??? O_o

- Martin

A note on the scale.

Starline 2500 is well supported and you are doing ships that are widely unavailable that were originally available in a different scale. I am sure, as in my own case, much of the vocal scale requests come from a desire to fit additional ships into old fleets that no longer get new product in the right scale.

-Eli

Overall I like it, but the forward swept nacelles in this case make the design look a little 'unbalanced' to me. I can't put my finger exactly on it since from certain angles it looks fine, like in the 1st glamour shot, but in the following three it looks 'off'. Radical suggestion; move the nacelles back but flip them 'above' the hull to maintain line of sight?

Otherwise I like it; the 'advanced' command pod always actually looked primitive to me. Your design is more interesting.

Regarding scale – Am I the only one with Starline 2500 fleets??? O_o

Quite possibly. ;)

But like Loud Ninja I already had good-sized fleets in Starline 2400 scale and had no desire to switch.

-Will

I for one will stick with the old 2400 scale and the Fasa line which I have a fair number and I like all the FASA designs that FASA came out with.

And now with Shapeways and some very nice people who made their own FASA ships(one way or the other) I've added the following FASA ships which FASA never got around to making:

FEDERATION
MAKIN
CONTINENT
ANTON
BRENTON
DURRETT
THUFIR
DERF
MARKLIN

KLINGON
L-13(FAT MAN)
D-4
D-6
D-20
D-11
D-14
D-16
K-27
L-6

ROMULAN
M-4
V-1
V-4
V-9
V-20
T-2

So overall I'm quite happy with my Star Trek FASA collection now.

I know there's many people who like the newer 2500 line but the main thing between the old 2400 scale and the new 2500 scale is storage.

Since the 2500 ships are bigger they must be stored in bigger boxes and hence you need more space to store them.

But for me I like the FASA ships more than any other Star Trek ships.

As digital models, I imagine offering them in multiple scales wouldn't be too hard.

FASA is, if I recall correctly, 1/3900 scale.

-Eli

I'd forgotten how ugly the original command pod was …

The command pod wasn't that ugly I've seen worse.

"Regarding scale – Am I the only one with Starline 2500 fleets??? O_o"

No sir. I've got quite a large selection that wouldn't mind having some of your designs added to them.:)

I think I have come to an idea of how I would use these in my games.

1) They represent an earlier version of the design, utilizing a more conventional command pod.

2) They represent a retrofitting of the design to a more conventional Klingon command pod as either a cost-cutting measure or due to feedback from crews.

-Eli

Don't worry Macrossmartin, you aren't the only one with 2500 scale fleets.

link

If you scroll to the post from August 27 you can see our collection. If you get these on Shapeways for sale I have a friend who is VERY interested in adding some to his KLingon fleet.

Worst case scenario, I get more ships for the fleet. The fact that they are not carbon copies of the original FASA ships, allows me to use them as other ships utilizing an established hull configuration.

-Eli

Before everyone gets too excited, allow me to repeat something I posted back in my first 3D Trek thread (the D10):

"EB – I should have clarified in my OP, I'm not currently planning to sell castings of my designs, these are really for my own enjoyment. My objective is to flesh out and fix up my Starline 2500 fleets, adding FASA designs as well as my own."

My initial plan was never to produce these commercially, although I do appreciate that (most) posters seems enthused to add them to their fleets. I'll take that as confirmation that my designs are not way off the mark! :)

Having said that – last night I contemplated the fact that many people would like to see these produced in 1/3900 (FASA / SFB) scale. I have no philosophical objection to that scale; I also have fleets of FASA minis, although they are not all my favourites. (Who else recalls the original FASA Connie Enterprise? Exquisite detail, but with scale-thin pylons that go all bendy!)

So, because I have no means of producing these in 1/3900 in the quantities I suspect will be required, I may instead either offer them through Shapeways

– or -

Ask someone like Studio Bergstrom if they would like to add them to their lines.

Which of those two potential channels of starship supply would people prefer? Print-as-you-need, or part of a 'regular' line of pewter minis? (The latter assumes that somebody wants to produce them!)

Answers on a trans-subspace postcard please. (Or post them here.)

Eli- I'd argue that the 2500 line is NOT supported. The initial release was substantial, yes, but additions since then have been few and far between. None of the Carriers, only one Battleship, no X Ships, and many of the SFB races are simply not represented.

– Granted, that doesn't worry me; I'm trying to produce something a bit more canonical than the SFB universe. (Although I won't brook such nonsense as the K'tinga class in service back in the 2150's!!)

– Well, the idea behind the D7-ish pod was indeed to better fit this model into the TOS era (2240-2280 approx.), as opposed to the 'post-refit' era. So, using it as an earlier incarnation was exactly what I am intending also.

– Digital or otherwise, there are dangers in scaling down a miniature. Some details will just not print beneath a certain dimension, but the real issue is the thickness of pylons, necks, wings, etc. While they may be sufficiently robust in their designed scale, there's no guarantee of that same quality translating down; most designers have to re-design their piece to make it work in a smaller scale, thickening up the thinner areas, essentially re-doing the whole model. (Have been doing some research into this.)

Wil – Your 'engines on top' suggestion was one of the first passes I made on my D18. But, it just didn't look Klingon! In fact, it looked somehow surprised, like it had raised eyebrows…!

– I don't think my solution for the nacelles is perfect, but it works for me. :)

Moonbeast and Dan – Hooray! I'm not a lone voice crying out in the wilderness!! :D

– Although I can't see your link, Dan; says it's a FB page I'm not entitled to see. :(

Thanks again for all the feedback, everyone. Next up will be the monstrous Ark Royal class carrier, a TOS design of my own, with more than a suggestion of the shape of things to come…

I would always prefer an actual manufacturer over a print on demand service. The customer price would be lower and there would be less question about quality control (in most cases).

-Eli

Wil – Your 'engines on top' suggestion was one of the first passes I made on my D18. But, it just didn't look Klingon! In fact, it looked somehow surprised, like it had raised eyebrows…!

– I don't think my solution for the nacelles is perfect, but it works for me. :)

And it's your ship so obviously go for it!

I would sound out Studio Bergstorm, they might indeed be interested and have a good setup for ordering 3d prints and using them for masters.

-Will

I would be glad to work with you to produce these minis in no-lead pewter, just send me an email MM to:

stumer (at) verizon (dot) net

Thanks!

'Drew

Can I say yet again, your designs are fantastic!! I just picked up a FASA D18 about a month ago from eBay and it was in pretty poor condition. It cleaned up reasonably well but it looks like its taken on a few too many combat situations.

I had thought about swapping the command pod for something a little bit more like the D7, and I thought that the positioning of the FASA ships nacelles gave the whole miniature an upside-down look.

When I saw your new design it was exactly how I pictured how this ship should look.

If you can get these produced (my favoured scale is the 1/3900 or thereabouts of the 2400 range) then I would try my best to purchase some… only problem being the continuous dropping in value of the GBP.

Thanks, EB!

Yes, the original FASA castings tend to be veterans of many a shoebox… unless they're mint condition ones that go for insane prices on eBay! O_o

Glad you like my re-design. For the Klingons I might have a go at the L9 next. Not much to fix there, just a few details really.

As for getting these into production – watch this space.

(Blimey, you're complaining about the Pound?? You seen where the Oz Dollar is lately???) ;)

An L9 with TOS style command pod would be great!!!!

The L-9 is just so ugly … it really violates the whole aesthetic of Star Trek TOS ships. Aside from the primary hull being too bulky, the warp engines are clutched in far too tightly.

I think the L-9 is a nice looking ship IMHO.

Are there any other ships that you think are ugly?

I like the L9, but like the Chandley, I suspect some of my liking comes from a fondness for its combat performance. :)

However, I think it is not too much of a stretch to see a hint of a Bat'leth in the curves of its main hull, which seems very appropriate.

The L6 is another matter; it looks mean in a plan view, but those long 'wings' are a bit overpowering when sculpted into three dimensions. I never could get that one right. :(

Anyway, more Klingon 'lights' to follow.

The L-13 "fatman" for me is totally is wrong. I have a model I picked up from eBay but it's too big for 2400, roughly built and an even rougher resin casting. But even if the model was good, the design just isn't Klingon. It doesn't have the predatory looks that a Klingon ship should have.

The miniature I have looks like a rougher version of this…

So if you could make a design that could help that design work I'd be really impressed.

Can't see your image, EB, but I know the 'Fatman'. A friend of mine has an unabiding passion for the thing.

Let's see if this shot from Brad Torgersen's excellent site shows up…

- She's a big brick of a thing! But in the 3-views, I think I detect a subtle hint of TOS Klingon design lineage. Needs some pointy curves. It would certainly be a challenge to make a more attractive version of the L-13.

Only 300 metres long, but the sheer volume of the main hull would require it to be split into separate parts. Shove the 'keel' forward, so the nacelles can wave at each other… no issues casting that thick, pro-wrestler neck… throw the deckhouse further back, to give some dynamism…

Hmm…

Whenever I see the Klingon L-13, this is what comes to mind…

MM the L-6 as some of my friends tell me looks like a bat but I do like the design.

People who dislike the L-13 often ignore the fact that it's awkward, bulky, ineffectiveness is all part of its story. It represents a stepping stone, and a failed one at that. The Klingon high command's first steps to a large battleship style vessel.

I often mix the L-13 in with the SFB B-10 as a direct lineage of design, eventually moving on to the L-24, which I do not like from an aesthetics point.

I, personally, love the Fat Man and own three in miniature. Tom they have a charm about them shows that not everything comes out of a naval shipyard is a supermodel or even the best possible result of the R&D. It's something that happens in real life, so why not in Star Trek.

-Eli

L-13 always struck me as the 'USS LONG BEACH' of the Klingon fleet.

Long Beach was a revolution for Naval Warfare (all missile armament, nuclear powered, and honking big for a Frigate/Cruiser/Whatever), but she was an ODD-LOOKING ship.

Not every ship can be the beauty queen, or even that successful in combat.

Yes, the L-13 is a glorious white elephant and should have a place of pride in any Klingon fleet. IMT (In My Trek) the L-13 was shuffled off to the Internal Security Forces as soon as they could be. The ISF was thrilled to receive a battleship… initially.

-Will

We used one in a game as a sort of Q-ship.

An L-13 hull was rearmed and equipped with effective weapons making maximum use of its sheer volume. The Federation commander thought he was facing the mighty white elephant and discovered too late that he had been duped.

-Eli

I see the Fatman has his fans! :D

Brad Torgersen seems to be on the same track as you, Eli. He too speaks of the virtues of seeing the L13 as proof that even in a fictitious alien fleet, there will be procurement mistakes. I don't know if the Klingons hold parliamentary committees to investigate such things though…

I think I will have a go at the L13. Pics when she's done, although I think this one might take a wee bit longer!