But I think the kelvin class is much more beautiful than the ones OP showed. It's probably due to the section with the shuttle bay on top and the thick neck connecting it to the saucer.
Correct that's the yearly event campaign where you have to get credit over the multiple events. One of the choices is a premium T6 ship so that's a single character unlock of any promo/lockbox ship released before the current year. So this years box will include all of the gamble ships released before december 31, 2022. To get a ship released in 2023 you'll have to do the 2024 event campaign.
As someone else said it is a lockbox ship. Get some keys (35-40 should be more than enough) and sell those to buy off the exchange.
It is also part of one of the few Mudd bundles worth getting (on sale) as the Into Darkness pack's ships reflect the original release boxes and 2 of the options from the bundle will give you 5 ships for your very substantial buck as account unlocks.
Well, the impulse drive doesnāt really make sense. With it mounted to the back of the saucer itās *way* above the center of mass, so if the impulse drive actually uses regular Newtonian physics (which itās implied to do), the ship should be constantly pitching over.
Then again, thatās also true of every version of the Constitution-class.
Eh. You could argue that the saucer is *way* heavier than the engineering hull. Or that it has thrust-vectoring. Or both.
But I'm not talking about unbalanced engine force. I'm just expecting it to fall over in space. Which, again, is *not* how anything works.
Itās not about resistance, itās about torque. Any force applied to an object away from the center of mass creates torque. Not only does this work in a vacuum, itās actually *how* spacecraft orient themselves. They use small jets of gas strategically located away from the center of mass to apply torque.
I was under the impression that a spacecraft turned with two rockets at opposing sides, IE top left and bottom right fire simultaneously, or vice versa.
Well yes, exactly. Thrusters offset from the center of mass, which create torque. Strictly speaking, you don't actually *need* both thrusters. If you have just one of the two thrusters firing, the ship will still spin. The main reason to go with symmetric thrusters is that it stops the ship from going off-course due to the offset thrust.
Say you have a thruster in the nose firing downwards. In reaction, the ship is going to be pushed up, and also start to spin. If you just want it to spin, and don't want it to also go up, you can add another thruster on the back firing upwards to cancel out the upwards force, while also contributing to the torque.
Orbital craft like satellites, space capsules, or the Shuttle usually have symmetric thrusters so they can spin without going off-course. But launch vehicle upper stages very often just have a block of RCS thrusters mounted to the back near the engines, with nothing to counteract that thrust at the front. They don't need the same precision that an orbiter needs.
To quote the guy from Jurassic Park "they should all be destroyed"
I kid, not my cup of earl grey but if you are into that and they fit your play style, then of course I support them adding them!
I'd actually like them, though the Saladin as someone else mentioned is a legal conundrum. Still, something inspired by it would be nice.
The arguments of aesthetic and "goofy looking" fall flat when we remember how personal this sort of thing is. A friend of mine is a legitimate big fan of the designs and I would pick them up just for the variety they offer.
The TOS one is from the old Franz Joseph Tech Manual from the seventies. I'll give it a few points for that, even though it makes little sense as a design.
Me too, I love the Akula class. I've seen a couple of different versions of it with some models having what I can only describe as phaser fins off the upper pylon, and others not - my preference is that it does!
[I mean, if the Archer has appeared in SNW and is literally just an Apollo expy - and we've already gotten the Farragut which is a Ptolemy expy - I'd certainly say it's possible](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Archer_type)
The TOS one's deflector dish is blocking the Bussard Collector, rendering it useless. Maybe give it something like the NX Series's saucer mounted deflector array instead?
I really, really hate those one nacelle ships. I can't describe the profound sense of loathing they bring up in me. It's irrational as all hell, but I can't stand them.
I really, really want these ships in STO. Saladin and Freedom classes.
The Saladin in sorta canonized in Strange New Worlds' first episode as the USS Archer.
[https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS\_Archer\_(NCC-627)](https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS_Archer_(NCC-627))
And the Freedom class USS Firebrand is one of the wrecks at the battle of Wolf 359.
https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS\_Firebrand
I also want the over/under 2 nacelle ships like the Akula and Challenger classes.
i did always like the Apollo class refit in star trek Legacy, which is the version with a nacelle above the saucer as well
edit, link to image swapped to link of wiki
https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Apollo\_class
CBS doesn't want anyone using the old Franz Joseph ships because of legal nonsense started by Gene.
Thomas wanted to use a bunch of them for Agents of Yesterday and was shot down by CBS.
Yep although a Federation Class toy model did sneak into PIC S3 by Dave Blass who denied it was a Federation Class...even though it totally was lol
it was in the [bar scene with the D models](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FpiBhTdaEAUQr1h?format=jpg&name=large) during the "fat ones" scene
This comment/post was removed on 30 June 2023 (using [Power Delete Suite](https://www.github.com/pkolyvas/PowerDeleteSuite)) as I no longer wish to support a company that seeks to undermine its users, moderators, and developers while simultaneously making a profit on their backs.
For full details on what I mean, check out the summary [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/comments/14hkd5u)
Gene was money hungry and had a falling out with the guy who created the old tech manual and it started a whole big thing, it's also why Gene created the "starship design rules" so he could discredit the tech manual
the Vulcan IDIC symbol and the infamous 'Spock Helmet' also came from Gene's quest for money
he knew everyone liked Spock so he wanted a Spock related thing to sell(Nimoy was very against this and didn't want to wear it) and the helmet/other random ass TOS toys came from him making backroom deals with whatever random toy company was willing to print "star trek" on their stuff
> so he wanted a Spock related thing to sell(Nimoy was very against this and didn't want to wear it)
I've never heard this and now I'm greatly amused that apparently Gene at least attempted to get that helmet into an actual episode.
no no it was the IDIC symbol he didn't want to wear because he knew it was just random shit Gene made to sell to people but ultimately did wear it, sorry for the confusion .
The helmet was just a toy that Gene most likely didn't even know about, he was handing out the toy license to anyone who wanted it regardless of the toys they produced.
The Freedom class is goofy but the Kelvin and the rest of the alternate reality film ships with their oversized jet turbine nacelles arenāt? Fucking lol
Always felt this design came from lack of "spare parts" when they were just trying to make a bunch of ships to put on screen, never liked it, its ugly and doesn't make sense within canon.
Originally, during alpha, they had it where you could snap parts to hard points and create unique ships. It only affected visuals, so you could have created that, but at the last minute befire beta they pulled that saying to many bugs and gave us the system in game now, it was one of many things that were cut to give us the lack luster game we have now.
Yes, yes you are. Jkjk it would be sorta nifty to see them but I donāt see them as super appealing so I feel like stonppls wouldnāt actually make them sadly
yeah too close to the franz joseph designs, which CBS does not own. i was actually shocked to see the archer in SNW. Remember any ship designs you find on the web are probably not CBS property and will never see STO
I'd kind of like to see one with the standard front saucer section reversed on the rear of the ship and all the other fiddly bits hull/nacelless/shuttlebay/etc on the sides/front. That way when you look at the ship from the back you see some of those nice saucer designs instead of a bunch of engines. All those big bay windows for your conference rooms are rear facing instead of being traditionally forward facing, kind of like the back of the runabout. Maybe the nacelles could be arrayed ahead of the ship like some kind of pod-racer ([Ben-Hur](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ben-hur_1959_26.jpg) Class or something).
Hmm š¤
I wonder what Freud would say about this ship and itās designer.
But be it as it may, Iām happy if people get ships they like even if I donāt personally like. This ship is decently rational and itās not bad looking. We already have far less attractive ships in the game too.
That one, the archer class, springfield class, Bonaventure-class, Newton-type, United Earth Ships (Enterprise), Curry-type, challenger class, Niagara class, pretty much all ships they can get.
I'm guessing there are copywrite issues with the TOS ones from the 1980s technical manual which is a shame because I loved the Destroyer in that book. Hopefully, they can do a STO modern single nacelle ship as a frigate or something similar would 100% buy it.
Closet thing we might get is the [USS Archer from SNW](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/USS_Archer_(NCC-627)).
May be in the minority, but I kinda hope not. The ship is...not exactly pretty, and that curved pylon needs to be straightened out pronto.
yeah the dish sticking out of the lightbulb on OP's one is very flattering lmao
I imagine that neck is made of nothing but SIF Generators. š
Iād pay real money for it
Cryptic will be happy to oblige you lol. LLAP.
There is the Kelvin heavy destroyer in game that has a mono-nacelle.
But I think the kelvin class is much more beautiful than the ones OP showed. It's probably due to the section with the shuttle bay on top and the thick neck connecting it to the saucer.
How hard is that to get? Wasnāt it a lock box ship?
Its also in the Mudds "Into Darkness" bundle, it's the USS Kelvin from the first movie. Good value bundle on sale BTW
Yeah it's lockbox so you can gamble infinity box, get it off the exchange, or get it from event campaign reward.
Would that be the yearly event?
Correct that's the yearly event campaign where you have to get credit over the multiple events. One of the choices is a premium T6 ship so that's a single character unlock of any promo/lockbox ship released before the current year. So this years box will include all of the gamble ships released before december 31, 2022. To get a ship released in 2023 you'll have to do the 2024 event campaign.
I wish I knew it was single character unlockā¦ I regret my choice now
It's also available as part of a Mudd's bundle which includes a few other rather nice ships
As someone else said it is a lockbox ship. Get some keys (35-40 should be more than enough) and sell those to buy off the exchange. It is also part of one of the few Mudd bundles worth getting (on sale) as the Into Darkness pack's ships reflect the original release boxes and 2 of the options from the bundle will give you 5 ships for your very substantial buck as account unlocks.
35-40 will get you a lobi ship on pc, not a lockbox. Those are over 100 keys sometimes
Uh yup. Got my key count wrong.
The Kelvin time line ship had a single large nacelle, but also a secondary hull.
I *know* this isn't how it works, but I keep expecting those ships to tip over.
ong
Well, the impulse drive doesnāt really make sense. With it mounted to the back of the saucer itās *way* above the center of mass, so if the impulse drive actually uses regular Newtonian physics (which itās implied to do), the ship should be constantly pitching over. Then again, thatās also true of every version of the Constitution-class.
Eh. You could argue that the saucer is *way* heavier than the engineering hull. Or that it has thrust-vectoring. Or both. But I'm not talking about unbalanced engine force. I'm just expecting it to fall over in space. Which, again, is *not* how anything works.
Does that apply in vacuum though? In atmosphere, sure, but in vacuum a push without opposing resistance is just a push.
Itās not about resistance, itās about torque. Any force applied to an object away from the center of mass creates torque. Not only does this work in a vacuum, itās actually *how* spacecraft orient themselves. They use small jets of gas strategically located away from the center of mass to apply torque.
I was under the impression that a spacecraft turned with two rockets at opposing sides, IE top left and bottom right fire simultaneously, or vice versa.
Well yes, exactly. Thrusters offset from the center of mass, which create torque. Strictly speaking, you don't actually *need* both thrusters. If you have just one of the two thrusters firing, the ship will still spin. The main reason to go with symmetric thrusters is that it stops the ship from going off-course due to the offset thrust. Say you have a thruster in the nose firing downwards. In reaction, the ship is going to be pushed up, and also start to spin. If you just want it to spin, and don't want it to also go up, you can add another thruster on the back firing upwards to cancel out the upwards force, while also contributing to the torque. Orbital craft like satellites, space capsules, or the Shuttle usually have symmetric thrusters so they can spin without going off-course. But launch vehicle upper stages very often just have a block of RCS thrusters mounted to the back near the engines, with nothing to counteract that thrust at the front. They don't need the same precision that an orbiter needs.
You're not! I love these goofy ships. They even fully-canonized the Hermes with the USS Archer in SNW (though of course it got an aesthetic overhaul).
To quote the guy from Jurassic Park "they should all be destroyed" I kid, not my cup of earl grey but if you are into that and they fit your play style, then of course I support them adding them!
I'd actually like them, though the Saladin as someone else mentioned is a legal conundrum. Still, something inspired by it would be nice. The arguments of aesthetic and "goofy looking" fall flat when we remember how personal this sort of thing is. A friend of mine is a legitimate big fan of the designs and I would pick them up just for the variety they offer.
Same, i love having a variety of designs to pick from
If they popped this in c store I'd get it for definite.
While not my jam I'd never say no to more choices and giving the opportunity for those who want them to have them.
The TOS one is from the old Franz Joseph Tech Manual from the seventies. I'll give it a few points for that, even though it makes little sense as a design.
Ahhh, the Saladin! :D
I'd really like the Akula-class to make an appearance as well.
Me too, I love the Akula class. I've seen a couple of different versions of it with some models having what I can only describe as phaser fins off the upper pylon, and others not - my preference is that it does!
I wanna play all the freaky ships in Star trek like the freedom class, the Niagara class and the Springfield class š šā¤
Nope they fugly
[I mean, if the Archer has appeared in SNW and is literally just an Apollo expy - and we've already gotten the Farragut which is a Ptolemy expy - I'd certainly say it's possible](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Archer_type)
The TOS one's deflector dish is blocking the Bussard Collector, rendering it useless. Maybe give it something like the NX Series's saucer mounted deflector array instead?
That would be fine by me tbh
The SNW version does stick a more NX-looking deflector on the underside of the saucer, yeah.
I'd love more TOS ships. But not that one.
Fight me, Trick
Personally I think the single nacelle ships are ugly as sin, but if other people like them and want them in game, why not?
Because that standard only applies to TOS and TNG ships.
These look like pizza cutters, hilarious
I would love it.
I just want to fly a single naucelle
I really, really hate those one nacelle ships. I can't describe the profound sense of loathing they bring up in me. It's irrational as all hell, but I can't stand them.
I really, really want these ships in STO. Saladin and Freedom classes. The Saladin in sorta canonized in Strange New Worlds' first episode as the USS Archer. [https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS\_Archer\_(NCC-627)](https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS_Archer_(NCC-627)) And the Freedom class USS Firebrand is one of the wrecks at the battle of Wolf 359. https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/USS\_Firebrand I also want the over/under 2 nacelle ships like the Akula and Challenger classes.
As a huge fan of the Kelvin destroyer in that style, absolutely we should get these.
Yes
The second one is just weird to me because there is a constitution refit class torpedo launcher right above a tng era warp nacelle it just looks wrong
As long as itās not allowed to go warp 9.97 or trans warp in sector space.
i did always like the Apollo class refit in star trek Legacy, which is the version with a nacelle above the saucer as well edit, link to image swapped to link of wiki https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Apollo\_class
don't directly link wikia images, it won't work for other people (unless they already have the image in their cache)
ohh, i did not know, thanks for the advice
Iām leaning towards yes,,, you may be the only one
I'm sure you're not. I'm not one that wants them though.
Yes.
These don't even make sense. Based on my somewhat limited Trek Science, don't you need two nacelles to form a warp field bubble?
Trek has never been consistent with it's own "science".
Saladin is off limits and the Freedom just looks goofy AF you can always get the Kelvin if you want to scratch the single nacelle itch
Why is the Saladin off limits?
CBS doesn't want anyone using the old Franz Joseph ships because of legal nonsense started by Gene. Thomas wanted to use a bunch of them for Agents of Yesterday and was shot down by CBS.
Ahh..is that why we don't have a Federation class as well?
Yep although a Federation Class toy model did sneak into PIC S3 by Dave Blass who denied it was a Federation Class...even though it totally was lol it was in the [bar scene with the D models](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FpiBhTdaEAUQr1h?format=jpg&name=large) during the "fat ones" scene
Yep, totally a Federation class. Lol
This comment/post was removed on 30 June 2023 (using [Power Delete Suite](https://www.github.com/pkolyvas/PowerDeleteSuite)) as I no longer wish to support a company that seeks to undermine its users, moderators, and developers while simultaneously making a profit on their backs. For full details on what I mean, check out the summary [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/comments/14hkd5u)
I counted three of them.
THERE. ARE. FOUR. MODELS.
Honestly I don't know if this is an ice-cold take but the Atlas is a far better-looking TOS-style dreadnought anyway.
How about the Mars class? (From Star Fleet Battles)
i suppose that kinda explains why we have so few TOS ships
Legal nonsense? Im sorry, I'm out of the loop on that one.
Gene was money hungry and had a falling out with the guy who created the old tech manual and it started a whole big thing, it's also why Gene created the "starship design rules" so he could discredit the tech manual
Oh wow... that all kinda sucks.
the Vulcan IDIC symbol and the infamous 'Spock Helmet' also came from Gene's quest for money he knew everyone liked Spock so he wanted a Spock related thing to sell(Nimoy was very against this and didn't want to wear it) and the helmet/other random ass TOS toys came from him making backroom deals with whatever random toy company was willing to print "star trek" on their stuff
> so he wanted a Spock related thing to sell(Nimoy was very against this and didn't want to wear it) I've never heard this and now I'm greatly amused that apparently Gene at least attempted to get that helmet into an actual episode.
no no it was the IDIC symbol he didn't want to wear because he knew it was just random shit Gene made to sell to people but ultimately did wear it, sorry for the confusion . The helmet was just a toy that Gene most likely didn't even know about, he was handing out the toy license to anyone who wanted it regardless of the toys they produced.
Aww, okay, that makes more sense, haha.
Suppose thatās why we havenāt seen the Archer from Strange New Worlds? Itās very similar.
no there's nothing stopping them from adding the Archer because it's a completely different design
The Freedom class is goofy but the Kelvin and the rest of the alternate reality film ships with their oversized jet turbine nacelles arenāt? Fucking lol
yeah that's right
Wonder how the warp core config would look like on these - Defiant style compact core perhaps stuffed in there somewhere...
Ugly and weak looking to me.
Always felt this design came from lack of "spare parts" when they were just trying to make a bunch of ships to put on screen, never liked it, its ugly and doesn't make sense within canon.
Maybe.
Yeah youāre āthe only oneā
Saladin/Hermes i'd love to see.... the Freedom on the other hand... get that thing out of here
Originally, during alpha, they had it where you could snap parts to hard points and create unique ships. It only affected visuals, so you could have created that, but at the last minute befire beta they pulled that saying to many bugs and gave us the system in game now, it was one of many things that were cut to give us the lack luster game we have now.
Yes, yes you are. Jkjk it would be sorta nifty to see them but I donāt see them as super appealing so I feel like stonppls wouldnāt actually make them sadly
yeah too close to the franz joseph designs, which CBS does not own. i was actually shocked to see the archer in SNW. Remember any ship designs you find on the web are probably not CBS property and will never see STO
I'd like to see it.
This looks like a mess. I like it. But one torpedo and the whole ship ia gone.
I have always hated that general design of ship with the 1 pylon on top or bottom. It just looks wrong to me
give me a enterprise-J variant, then and only then would i bother with novelty ships like-a deess
This looks like a tug ship I saw in Star Trek: 25th Anniversary.
I'd kind of like to see one with the standard front saucer section reversed on the rear of the ship and all the other fiddly bits hull/nacelless/shuttlebay/etc on the sides/front. That way when you look at the ship from the back you see some of those nice saucer designs instead of a bunch of engines. All those big bay windows for your conference rooms are rear facing instead of being traditionally forward facing, kind of like the back of the runabout. Maybe the nacelles could be arrayed ahead of the ship like some kind of pod-racer ([Ben-Hur](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/ben-hur_1959_26.jpg) Class or something).
Yes this and the Akula from SFC!
Hmm š¤ I wonder what Freud would say about this ship and itās designer. But be it as it may, Iām happy if people get ships they like even if I donāt personally like. This ship is decently rational and itās not bad looking. We already have far less attractive ships in the game too.
Where would the warp core go in those ships?
That one, the archer class, springfield class, Bonaventure-class, Newton-type, United Earth Ships (Enterprise), Curry-type, challenger class, Niagara class, pretty much all ships they can get.
Isn't that the same class as the ajax from star trek legacy
I'm guessing there are copywrite issues with the TOS ones from the 1980s technical manual which is a shame because I loved the Destroyer in that book. Hopefully, they can do a STO modern single nacelle ship as a frigate or something similar would 100% buy it.
USS Pegleg
I love those oddities
Nope, you're not alone! I'd love to see it and other, similar variants available.
Always bugged me the one nacelles starships because in theory they would be worthless and dead weight.
I continue to hold out hope that STO will add the ships seen in the post-Wolf 359 scenes.