Topic: A Wiley Coyote...

[Wicked Zombie]

A TOS Era fighter for the Feds, designed by Atolm:





















A standard and warp-engine equipped version is included, as well as alternate textures for the Starbase and Planetary Outpost versions.

[FoaS_XC]

NOICE!

[TAnimaL]

that is TOTALLY WICKED!
Something about them is completely retro while being absolutely modern...

[FoaS_XC]

It actually resembles a concept I was working on, but abandoned in favor of the Macross-esque fighters. Is that were you got the idea Atolm?

[Magnum357]

All I can say is WOW!     My only suggestion is to bring the cockpit forward a bit, doesn't seem like enough room for the engines.

[CaptCujo]

Excellent design, I've already downloaded it and incorporated into OP.

I would love to see you redo the stock ( ridiculous ) Mirak/Kzinti fighter using FoaS_XC's Mirak textures ( hint ).

[marstone]

All I can say is WOW!     My only suggestion is to bring the cockpit forward a bit, doesn't seem like enough room for the engines.

I will agree, cockpit forward, and maybe bubble it up some.  Doesn't look like the pilot can see to the front with that low windshield (spaceshield, whatever).

[Norsehound]

That's the most 1960's esque TOS spacefighter I've ever seen. I'd almost say this is what we would have seen onscreen during TOS...

[Klingon Fanatic]

Nice work WZ!

[Tus-XC]

All I can say is WOW!     My only suggestion is to bring the cockpit forward a bit, doesn't seem like enough room for the engines.

I will agree, cockpit forward, and maybe bubble it up some.  Doesn't look like the pilot can see to the front with that low windshield (spaceshield, whatever).

Hmmm... don't think it matters, think of what the F35 helmet can do and then fast forward to trek time

[FoaS_XC]

I concur - plus visual contact isn't going to mean anything in space ranges.

[marstone]

If you don't need to "see", then why even have the weak spot on your ship of the canopy?  I would say being able to see directly by "eye" would be a safety issue, while on deck, landing, close maneuvers, back-up for systems failure due to damage, etc.

It just doesn't make sense to me to have a canopy that lets you look up? sorry, to me looks like it is there because a fighter is "suppose" to have one, but it was just textured on the hull.

[FoaS_XC]

Exactly what I was thinking.

[sierracharlie]

I think pilots will always request a window. When the mercury capsules were designed, they originally didnt have a window, the "pilot" didnt need it. The capsule was completely automated. The Mercury 7 astronauts revolted as they refused to be "spam in a can".

I think visual for a combat spacecraft is a must. Stuff breaks. I flew in vietnam era F-4 phantoms and the mechanical radar would often fail in high G conditions. Imagine if the bird had an automatic landing system that required the radar to function.

[wulf111]

i agree with the others great design but the cockpit canopy is defiantly to far back on the fuselage. to me upon a closer look the texture seems to be backwards maybe if it was turned around the canopy will be in the correct place.

[Wicked Zombie]

The canopy is built into the model, not painted on, so a quick fix isn't possible.

The recessed view is a nod to the stock Fed fighter (the Wraith class as some call it), which also has it's cockpit hidden behind the forward hull.

Replacing the canopy with a hull-door just wouldn't look right, so I left it as-is to provide a sense of familiarity and a quick access point for the pilot. From what I've seen, Starfleet is heavily reliant on technology anyway so having automation, tractor-beam landings and computer assisted maneuvering would be standard for their way of thinking.

Besides, starships themselves don't have windows on the bridge for tactical uses, just a big holographic screen that's fed data from sensors all over the ship. If any of those systems are offline, I doubt anybody is going to run to the front window and start spouting targeting range info to Mr. Chekov; what they are gonna do is shout at Scotty to hurry up and fix it while Kirk stalls the enemy for repair time.

Not that it matters as how often have we ever seen the viewscreen fail, despite the ship suffering catastrophic damage? If they've managed to master super-reliability for a tv set, I think a fighter HUD wouldn't be that far behind. Sure the HUD could fail, but just as easily could the phasers and I doubt anyone would suggest installing a GE MiniGun into the fighter for extra redundancy.

As for the position of the drive, who's to say the bulk of the engine isn't in the front of the hull, like a modern car, with just the exhaust port mounted aft? There's a reason the warp drive wasn't built-in, afterall.

[FoaS_XC]

WZ has my concurrence (not that he cares) on all points.

[marstone]

don't agree, but not my model so doesn't really matter.  But I do agree with the other ones point, the canopy does look backwards.  Last word.

[Atolm-Rising]

The design is rather old a couple of years I think... but regardless, if you look at the sketches you can see that i took into account a lot of stuff, that cannot be actually implemented into the model, like the sinking cockpit(in atmosphere and in low speeds it would rise to help aid the pilot if needed.  while at warp, and combat, it would sink to give the ship a smaller profile).
in space visuals are totally useless, but there are situations that could use it as an option, thus the design's configuration.  Stylistically, the shape was derived, by looking retro-esque, while being cutting edge.

[Kreeargh]

Kick arse I love the design but wheres the dl? I know im stupid but i am not blind  ?

[FoaS_XC]

on WZ's site: DRS

[Dizzy]

Damn cool ftr.