Topic: Klingon disruptor cannon

[OlBuzzard]

I realize that from time to time the ST producers changed the graphics, and details on a ship for weapons display ....  the TOS changes in phasers for the Enterprise alone is a primary example of that.

I was just wondering ..  ( since we have a WIP for a good Klingon model ... )  what changes were made on the disruptor cannons (if any).

It seems to me that the fired from the front of the nacelles ... and on occasion the forward torp tubes were replaced with "heavy" disruptors.

I'm trying to remember (from the screen play stand point) ...  what modeling "parts" were used as indicators for them as well.

I seems to me that there was really not that much there  ...  except for the BOP.

Input?

(yes this is another one of those questions designed to get as many of us as possible to discuss something that might benefit everyone in the process)

[Johanobesus]

I don't believe we ever actually saw a D7 firing in TOS, and the few times we saw the ship at all there was very little detail.  I don't think the K'tingas in the movies ever used disruptors, only torpedoes.  In one TNG episode a K'tinga attacks the Enterprise, and the disruptors clearly fire from the nacelles.  I think this may be the only depiction of this type of ship using disruptors, but I'm not sure. It's the only instance I remember, but my memory is notoriously bad.

The K'vort fired green balls from it's forward tube during the Klingon civil war, and these were referred to as disruptors.  Of course, the very existence of the K'vort is just one more reason I hate TNG.  I believe we've seen both green balls and solid green beams coming from the forward mount on the Vorcha.

[OlBuzzard]

As far as your memory is concerned...

To tell ya the truth ....  I'm in a bout the same boat.  It seems to me that the "fx" that was used in most of the movies displayed the Klingon fire as you indicated.

But, frankly I could have easily overlooked something.

I also agree that there could have been a little better job of developing newer Klingon ships for TNG.

Hmmm

I just may have to try to do something about that ...

At least one good Advanced Cruiser to match the AAC I developed for the Feddies....  or maybe a new CA class.

[Jaeih t`Radaik]

From Johanobesus:

I don't believe we ever actually saw a D7 firing in TOS...

Incorrect. In the TOS episode 'Elaan of Troyius', a Klingon D7 battlecruiser fires green pulses from the nacelle tips, or possibly nacelle pylons. It's not very precise on screen, but it's generally accepted that it was firing from the nacelle tips.

In TOS, the Klingon/Romulan battlecruiser was never seen to fire PhoTorps, and SFB has the Klingon Navigational Deflector/Long Range Sensor disk in what came to be the forward torpedo tube of the 'STI: TMP' K't'inga-class.

In 'TMP', a K't'inga fres three red PhoTorps at V'Ger from the forward tube and two of them from the aft tube.
The three K't'inga's in 'STII: TWoK' were reuse of the 'TMP' footage, so they are firing standard PhoTorps from the forward tube.
The only other time we saw a D7/K't'inga-class arming/firing weapons in TMP-era was the Qo'noS One in 'STVI: TUC'.

Kruge's BoP fires yellow torps from the command pod tube in 'STIII: TSFS'.
Klaa's BoP fires yellow torps from the command pod tube, and 'pulse phaser'-style disruptors from the wingtips in 'STV: TFF'.
Chang's experimental BoP fired standard PhoTorps and no disruptors in 'TUC'.

As for the TNG/DS9/VOY stuff... well, I'm a Classic Trek fan. Didn't pay that much attention.

Hope this is of some help.

[OlBuzzard]

Thanks ...

That was pretty much what I thought too.  Some fell that a 1/2 spherical unit statically placed in a few areas around the bulk head ..  and the boom near the main hull make good indicators as well.

IMHO ..   there is just not conclusive evidence aside from the places you have mentioned. 

I'm not trying to make too big a deal of this ..  just trying to gather as much information as possible.

thanks

[Jaeih t`Radaik]

NP. What do you mean by the static half-sphere? Are you talking about an actual disruptor emitter on the outer surface of the nacelle pylon/engine tip?

I take it from the disruptors at the boom joint you mean the disruptor arcs from FASA? I never liked the FASA ship designs. Don't know all that much about the game in general. I know that the Chandley-class frigate was much beloved by Fred players, but it is damn ugly and badly designed--like so many of the FASA ships. Very few FASA ships are worthwhile (aesthetically speaking) but the Loknar is one of them. Though, it is just a TMP-refit variation of the SFB NCL hull.

[OlBuzzard]

Dunno for certain of the origin .. I'm not a student of SFB  (only a general working knowledge) ..  and FASA as well.  Some of the stuff that comes from FASA is interesting.  I'm sure I would take it over stuff from any of the TV or Movie stuff though.

It should be noted that while I'm not a "cannon" purist as such (Trek cannon) I do try to treat a model evaluation or componenets from a model fairly. ( Hence the discussion we have now).  IMHO .. it helps all of us to see where certain "ideas" came from.

BTW...  thanks for the input ..  and participation.

[Jaeih t`Radaik]

YW. You'll find it kinda hard to shut me up on TOS/SFB/SFC, I love talking about it.

Plus, since I usually hang out in the 'Fan Fiction Forum' (I'm a writer, go read my stuff there) it's kinda dead. Not much in the way of discussion, so, now I'm into the Ship Freak Forum, and the ships were why I liked ST in the first place. If I can design my own...ooooohhhh! *gets shivers*

[Mr_Tricorder]

I agree with Jaeih t`Radaik about FASA ships.  I prefer SFB designs.  True SFB designs are generally too blocky, but I love what some of the people here have done with them.  I also really like the stock SFC ship designs and have been working on making models based on the stock models.

I am, or at least used to be, a canon "purist", but I've lightened up a lot in the past year or two where that's concerned.  Unfortunately, there has never been much information about the layout of non-Federation ships, especially TOS era when the models were the least detailed (I remember reading somewhere that the original Romulan Bird of Prey was a piece of trash they found on the backlot that they painted and told the camera guy not to get too close to it.) so I don't feel too bad about going with non-canon sources or making stuff up myself anymore.

[OlBuzzard]

I agree with Jaeih t`Radaik about FASA ships.  I prefer SFB designs.  True SFB designs are generally too blocky, but I love what some of the people here have done with them.  I also really like the stock SFC ship designs and have been working on making models based on the stock models.

I am, or at least used to be, a canon "purist", but I've lightened up a lot in the past year or two where that's concerned.  Unfortunately, there has never been much information about the layout of non-Federation ships, especially TOS era when the models were the least detailed (I remember reading somewhere that the original Romulan Bird of Prey was a piece of trash they found on the backlot that they painted and told the camera guy not to get too close to it.) so I don't feel too bad about going with non-canon sources or making stuff up myself anymore.

I think the main thing is to treat the designs "fairly" as respecting the Trek saga as much as possible:  even if its' something new.

[ModelsPlease]

I agree with Jaeih t`Radaik about FASA ships.  I prefer SFB designs.  True SFB designs are generally too blocky, but I love what some of the people here have done with them.  I also really like the stock SFC ship designs and have been working on making models based on the stock models.

I am, or at least used to be, a canon "purist", but I've lightened up a lot in the past year or two where that's concerned.  Unfortunately, there has never been much information about the layout of non-Federation ships, especially TOS era when the models were the least detailed (I remember reading somewhere that the original Romulan Bird of Prey was a piece of trash they found on the backlot that they painted and told the camera guy not to get too close to it.) so I don't feel too bad about going with non-canon sources or making stuff up myself anymore.

I think the main thing is to treat the designs "fairly" as respecting the Trek saga as much as possible:  even if its' something new.

Agreed.

[Jaeih t`Radaik]

With regard to established Trek ship design, especially in the TOS/TMP era, I try to evaluate a design as fairly as possible with regard to the design itself, not to any classical sense of "canon" design (and gents, it is "canon" when we're talking about Trek lore, a "cannon" is a big gun).

Anyone seen the FASA Andor-class "missile cruiser"? It's a piece of crap. The nacelles simply cannot be jettisoned without destroying the ship, and the secondary hull is a useless conglomeration of lines.

However, the Abbe-class photon destroyer was actually thought out. A standard saucer with a streamlined pylons linking to the nacelles, and the photon pod itself is self-contained and apparently has it's own reactors for the tubes. That pod could easily be replaced by a scientific package, cargo container, or maybe even a small carrier pod. It makes the ship itself very versatile in true Starfleet style, and is a very early version of TNG's Nebula-class.

The Chandley class that I've heard every-FASA-one loves is almost there, but the too-long warp nacelle pylons completely spoil the lines of the ship, as well as making them very vulnerable to enemy fire and even collisions.Now, I'm not overly sure where the nacelles should be on that ship, but the hullform of the bulky rear hull makes another location difficult.

I like ships that make sense and aren't just a re-arrangement/slight modification of an existing design. The design has to make sense to me. The Andor sure doesn't. The Chandley works, but isn't pretty or well-balanced. The Abbe is well-designed.

'Nuff said. *nods decisively*