Narkova Drive Yards Seeker-Class Cruiser

So, finally, after, what, like, 4 months or something, I've completed a new ship: the Narkova Seeker-Class cruiser.

Main view:

The latest development from Narkova Drive Yards, the Seeker-Class cruiser is a kind of mid-range all-purpose vessel. It is equipped with 12 rapid-fire turbolaser turrets, 4 dual-tube torpedo turrets, and 4 forward-facing heavy turbolaser emplacements. Styled after a common Narkovian fish, the Seeker-Class is also equipped with stardrives designed to be able to function underwater as well as in atmosphere or in space. This, along with two high-capacity hangar bays, allows the Seeker-Class to act as a mobile underwater staging base for water-worthy starfighters as well as an escort or carrier vessel.

Side view:

Top view:

Front view:

Stardrive array:

I had a lot of fun building this one. That is, when I wasn't tearing my hair out over what in the world to do next. The bricks you can see are all connected by a central rectangular prism with all sides covered in studs. It also has a new paint scheme.

The .lxf is available on the LEGO Gallery: http://www.us.lego.com/en-us/gallery/572e9998-c1d0-4c7d-a92e-4894bd691d79?index=2&categoryid=64929898-c52f-49d8-b106-c0c36314093c

Enjoy!

So I kind of skipped the description and went straight for the images, and my immediate reaction was "oh my goodness it's a space fish". Then I read the description, and lo and behold it is indeed a space fish. I guess that means your design was a success!

In all seriousness, the sleek profile, general color scheme, and various finer details lend themselves very well to the vessel's aquatic thematic. While I'm sure many of the ships we've built over the years would be capable of underwater operation, I think this is the first time we've seen a design specifically structured with that capability in mind. Props!

S-H: Danke! That's pretty much exactly what I was going for: submarine meets star cruiser.

Well, as SH said, HOPEFULLY our ships are watertight (or else we'd have problems with the vacuum of space and all) but I don't think we've had a ship designed specifically for submarining for a long time. It's VERY good, but I do have one question-- how does it get back to space from the water? Are there repulsorlifts that are just sort of assumed to be there, like Star Destroyers, or is there some super-fancy thing you came up with? Repulsorlifts are totally okay, by the way. That's how mine work. xD

This ship is extremely snazzy from every angle. I really like how you built the armament; you managed to put a good number of heavy guns on it without detracting from the sleek design. Awesome work!

Everyone above summed up this awesome ship pretty well. It is indeed a REALLY good looking space-fish- well done! The side hangers/detailing, the SNOT work, the engines, the nose with the hanger armor paneling, the color scheme... I REALLY like this ship! It is VERY unusual, but in a good way.

After careful though, I have but three suggestions:
1: Laser cannons. You need a point defense system.
2: Aft facing weapons. Don't leave your ship's rear completely undefended.
3: The top fin. I would swap out the "plate w. bow 2x2x2/3" pieces for "brick with bow 1x4" pieces, moving the trans blue plate back, a stud closer to the aft of the ship. This gives it a more organic feel in my opinion. I would leave the two side fins as they are.

One more thought: The side SNOT work just before the engines would not be very aerodynamic, which actually counts for something in atmosphere/under water. As I do not have a suggestion on how to improve this but still keep the awesome appearance, I did not add this to my suggestions section. It's just something to think about.

I now fully expect you to make a new iteration of this ship that is even more awesome than this one. (Just kidding. Only do it if you want to )



All in all, this ship is one extremely unique addition to the PCG verse, and one I am glad to share this universe with.

Nice! I saw it on the LEGO Gallery.

Daragon: Yup, it's basically the same system as a Star Destroyer. Thanks!
MAD: Thank you!
Dino: Danke! I see what you mean about those things you mentioned. As it happened, I already had a another version of the Seeker underway. Here's the completed Seeker Mk II.

Main view:

The first version had mostly Star Wars weapons systems, but I made this one have Star Trek weapons. Torpedo turrets are actually built, but things like fore and aft phaser strips are just implied on the model. I tried the fin modifications you mentioned, but I found that I actually like them where they are a bit better. It is possible for a ship to have Star Wars-style engines and a hyperdrive and have Star Trek weapons at the same time, right?

I also managed to trim down the engine area. It looks much smoother now.

New stardrive housing:

Which version do you like better?

Talmid: Thank you!

Whoa, when did all this happen?! I get home from school, check the portal, realize it isn't updating, check the main site, and suddenly the MSI has a new carrier with a full page of comments?!

That's it. The universe is conspiring against me.

While I plot my revenge, I'll take the time to note how much I like the ship. The idea of an underwater-style ship is an interesting one; I was actually thinking of something similar myself, but the idea is still pretty murky ATM. I like the fish style (though I must agree with Dino that parts of it aren't as hydrodynamic as they possibly should be). I'm also interested in what editing technique you used for the pics; it has somewhat of a drawn, sketch-y look. A very good ship, all told!

(As for the ST-version: usually it's the phasers shown on the hull and torpedoes implied, not the other way around- But hey, it's your ship! )

I really like both versions. I can't pick one over the other.


Mighty: I actually show torpedo launchers and phasers. In my newer ships at least, I use black pieces for phasers, and the plate 2x2 round piece as a torpedo launcher (for bigger launchers that can fire more torps)/as a pair of launchers.

Mighty: Danke! Well, I didn't want the thing to look too much like a fish. It is primarily a spaceship, after all. I may try to further sleekify it later, but for now I like how it looks. Maybe I could give the ship a specialized energy shield that functioned as a hydrodynamic shell underwater.

I didn't edit the pics at all. I just turned LDD's advanced shading function up to the max before I took the screenshots.

Well, I would've added visible phaser strips, but I couldn't think of how to do that without ruining the colors or the shape. Something to think about in the next version?

Dino: Thank you!

Dino- I meant in the RL models. I also model both, I'm just saying hey could get away with it no problem.

Spud- Ah, gotcha. I should turn up the graphics on LDD for me too....

Wow Spud. This ship might be quite strange, but that is not in anyway bad. I absolutely love the fishy design and the features of a starship mounted onboard. Very unique and excellent design (as well as a great, exotic color scheme ). The smooth, shell-like winglets in the new version are a very nice addition. The star drive is also extremely well-designed.

However, I feel that this ship could become even cooler with some changes.
1. The second version lacks armaments. I absolutely detest the idea of invisible weapons in general, and I recommend using something, even studs, to represent the cannons. However, this is merely a personal preference and is not a big deal. Regardless, the ship needs some heavier weaponry. I think that the first version, combined with the second version, and possibly some armaments protecting the bridge, fins, rudder, underside, and star drive would make this much better-armed.

While this will take away from the hydrodynamic design, it will heavily increase this ship's surviviability and offensive and defensive power. TBCH, it would be very difficult to create a perfectly hydrodynamic design without either sacrificing essentially all armaments and other external systems or making a retracting bay for each of the weapons, which would be extremely difficult. Thus, I like the first version better.

2. As Dino pointed out earlier, the ship needs more AA/PDS weapons. The rapid fire turbolasers can't cover every aspect of the ship, especially the stern and the bridge, which is a problem. I'd recommend adding guided missile pods to rectify this problem, meaning you can essentially fire missiles from a single point that can hit anywhere around the ship.

3. I really like the fins, but they do take away from the hydrodynamics of the ship. I really like them though, but I think if you made them smaller by just a bit, it would make the ship more hydrodynamic but still cool looking.

I don't think rectifying the hydrodynamics problem is as important as makes of it. While it may occasionally spend time in water, I assume this ship is more for space combat, and additionally, what are the chances that you'll just happen to be orbiting a planet with a body of water in the path of your crashing ship?

Overall, an excellent and unique ship. I love the design!

Like PXR, I actually like the first one better, just because of the heavier weapon banks on the sides. I also recommend representing every weapon on the ship in some way; for tiny weapons like laser cannons or other point-defense weapons, I typically use the smooth stud piece. Here's an idea, though-- since all you changed in that area (as far as I can tell) is put a little "shell" thing there instead of the weapons, which is way more aerodynamic, perhaps make that a section of sliding armor plating? In vacuum, it retracts to reveal the heavier weapons. In water, it deploys to allow for more viable aerodynamics. Idk, just a thought.

As to the mixing of ST and SW tech, the PCG-verse is neither ST nor SW, though it takes place in a primarily ST setting (which is why a lot of people use phasers but we still have Force-users). You can use/mix basically any tech you want, and if some of it doesn't make sense, come up with a vaguely scientific modification. xD

I thought the Force was one of the few things we didn't import from SW.

Mighty: Be careful; turning up advanced shading makes LDD run really slow.

PXR: Thanks! I think I will make a third version that has more weapons. And you're right about the ship not spending much time underwater. Do you mean the dark blue side fins or the light blue top/bottom fins?

Daragon: That retracting armor is a really good idea! I could even extend that retract ability to some of the dorsal and underside weapons I'm going to add. That way the ship can have lots of weapons only usable in space when areo- and hydrodynamics aren't important, then they can just stow away for underwater ops. I really like that idea.

Oh good, I was a little worried that I would have to replace the hyperdrive with a warp core and add warp nacelles, which I've always thought were much too vulnerable to damage. If you knock out just one the ship can't achieve FTL travel.

Last I checked, Mighty, we had Jedi. Even if we discount my former bio for Superdude (which has totally changed), Flipz made his character a Jedi Master, and I believe Jred considers anything written in a story by one of the Council at any point to be PCG canon.

Sweet, Spud, I'm looking forward to seeing it. xD I agree-- I find the ST style in general to be a somewhat ridiculous design template; the basic saucer-connected-to-smaller-aft-section I can roll with, and have used before (such as in the Sentinel) but ships like the Enterprise I don't find even a little bit aesthetically pleasing, aside from the fact that every ship built like that is a military liability by design. xD That's why I look more to Star Wars for design inspiration; besides the Empire's nasty tendency towards huge, raised superstructures with the bridges on top (the superstructures I can understand because of the intimidation factor, but slapping the bridges up there? WHY?? xD), SW ships tend to be more...I don't know, compact-feeling. SW ships, even though they have wildly different designs because of the thousands of different cultures building them, feel like they're based on thousands of years of interstellar travel. That makes sense, though-- SW FTL tech has been around for at least ten times as long as ST tech; thinking realistically, ST tech should be completely obsolete in every way. The only reason it isn't is because when SW was made, it was made with 1980's brains, which were not very good at imagining the future, setting a tech threshold that the more recent Expanded Universe has found it very difficult to raise.

This was supposed to be a quick response but I was distracted while I wrote this and now it's a rant. xD

Lol, Supe and I had the exact same idea with the retracting armor. But anyway, I really look forward to that.

@Spud: The side ones on the winglet that are dark blue.

@Supe: I completely agree about both the ST ships and the ISD's having exposed bridges. Simple projector screens and sensory banks can recreate what is going outside live, instead of giant, highly un-intimidating bridges that are easy targets, not fear-instilling.

Actually, while I don't know how hyperdrives work, I can't see it being possible to traverse into another dimension. On the other hand, Alcubierre (warp) drives are much more plausible, given that you can fulfill the energy (and negative energy*) requirements for an Alcubierre drive. However, acceleration (based on what IK) for an Alcubierre drive is very slow and takes significant amounts of time to even reach c. I've actually been looking into GDS's as a possible replacement to act as a more effective, faster FTL-style travel type, but we'll see.

*That depends on whether negative energy exists, or if it can be someday artificially synthesized.

Technically speaking, ST ships already employ external sensors to simulate the outside environment- yet, for some reason, they still put the bridges in really exposed positions.

I sorta agree on the design philosophies presented here; I'm not entirely a fan of the whole thin-pylons-connecting everything design, which is why I tend to opt for neckless designs when I go orthodox (also, they just look cooler, period ). The main reasoning behind the design is that it somehow improves warp-bubble formation/maintenance or something; in other words, efficiency at FTL speeds. Of course, there are plenty of races that use warp drives but don't have that layout (or warp nacelles, for that matter*), so IDK. That would require further thought....

PXR- Yeah, Alcubierre drives are way too slow in this context; most ST ships are capable of doing well over 100+c instantly, I believe, so something as slow as an Alcubierre would only really be useful for in-system FTL travel.

*BTW, I believe most two-nacelle ships can still go to warp with only one, it's just sub-optimal.

@Tetra: Wait a sec, so Alcubierre drives are different from warp drives?

Daragon/PXR/Mighty: Agreed all around. That's why all my ships (with a couple rare exceptions like the Firefly III) are SW templates, i.e., hyperdrives, turbolasers, and NO FLIMSY NECK PYLONS!!

Now, to be clear, Narkova vessels use hyperdrive technology from the Stargate SG-1/Atlantis universe. These hyperdrives are actually scientifically explained, unlike those from SW. SG-1 drives open a portal, a bridge if you will, to subspace. The ship is then catapulted through the portal and into subspace, raising its speed to many dozens of times the speed of light. Not only is the SG-1 method more easily explained than SW hyperdrives, but the jump to FTL speed looks so much cooler.

PXR: Ah, those ones. Well, I might be able to tweak them a bit. I'll see what I can do with the next version.

By the way, Dino, I consider this conversation to be on-topic, because it's helping me decide which style future Narkova vessels will be.

PXR- Yeah, completely different.

That's almost exactly how SW hyperdrives work, actually, Spud; they force a hole into hyperspace, a higher-level dimension where spatial and temporal correlations are WAY closer. Then they simply use their sublight drives in that dimension, and pop out somewhere completely different. It's like standing on one end of a blanket, bunching up the blanket so the other end is right next to you, stepping on to that end, and then stretching the blanket back out. xD Better hyperdrives don't make you go faster in hyperspace, from what I understand, they just streamline your little "bubble" of regular space, similar to warp drives.

Yours probably do look cooler, though, if they were made anytime past the 80's. xD

I was enjoying watching the conversation too much to tell you to get back on topic... and besides,
1: this keeps coming back to the ship and it's tech (intelligently I might add)
2: I really only care about being "on topic" if the topic owner is annoyed by people talking about random stuff instead of their creation/the topic subject. Or if it gets so hopelessly far off topic that it degrades the forum by making it just goofy. I'm not the LUCL mods. I just want to be sure that the creator of a ship/vehicle/fighter/story/tank/etc doesn't feel hurt when conversation shifts to totally random, out of place stuff.

Carry on gentlemen





I agree with the general consensus: the first version looks awesome because of the big guns. Although I haven't decided on the other, non weapon/FTL related, changes yet as both look really good.