Hobbyist Forums banner

AeroShuttle Images

13K views 62 replies 24 participants last post by  Madkoifish 
#1 ·
For you Prince of Styrene II! :)
 

Attachments

See less See more
5
#7 ·
In a nutshell, back at Foundation, we got into our heads that it would be cool to see the "captains yacht" of the Voyager, that being the Aeroshuttle. Rick Sternbach gratuitously did a prelim design and I used part of that and designed the ship you see here. Mojo and I did a whole launch sequence, on spec, meaning "free" and then had it shown to Rick Berman. The response: Mr Berman thought it was nice, but didn't want to trump the Captain's yacht launch sequence from the upcoming film "Insurrection". As you remember that was a VERY dramatic, epic and cool launch sequence........:rolleyes:
 
#8 ·
Wow! Great work, Rob! I like the detailing and the fact that the design is clearly within the Starfleet lineage looking like it incorporates some of the stylings of the runabout. :thumbsup: I love shuttles anyway, but this is a very fine example. Too bad TPTB were so anal about everything.
 
#10 ·
^Yeah, it was just a glorified shuttle that popped out of the part we thought was a torpedo launcher.

Rob, I hope those wings on the AeroShuttle aren't supposed to generate atmospheric lift, 'cause nothing with that cross-section is gonna generate anything but drag!
 
#15 · (Edited)
Well, if we had aired the ship, I was going to refine the wings to be a little less "blunt trauma" to the aerodynamics. But when we got nixed, we moved on.....so, it stands as is. I've thought about refining it for next years Calendar, but now I don't think I'll have the time...

The only other original design that was also chopped (that I remember now)was the John Eaves Klingon D-6 or D-5 that I included it in my calendar image for 2006. It was originally done FOR FREE for ST:Enterprise by Koji, who stayed up 36 hours to do it for the show. It looked great, but then the "producer(s)" said, "put more windows on it". We said no (You have to understand that we did so much extra, that at that point it was the straw that broke the camels back when they were being mindlessely trivial and unappreciative). So, in there infinite wisdom, they choose to use a lo-rez K'Tinga model (from a timeline over 100 years later) we had lying around. Because that was much more logical than a ship that needed 10 more windows that no one would EVER notice!!!! E boy...
 
#20 · (Edited)
Sorry, work has had me working 10 hour days! :freak: Again, many thanks!! :)
<edit> Plus the near-5 year old. you ain't got not time with one 'o them around! :lol:

Now I can build this puppy!!!

Also, just out of curosity, did you ever build any of the landing gear? It'd be interesting to see. Looks like three feet on it, right? Oh, wait. I just saw the aft view. Are the protrusions on the ventral side the landing gear?

<edit> Whew! too many edits for this post!
Rob, in looking at the aft view, there's a white rectangle on the underside. In the ventral view, it looks like it belongs to the small rectangle-ish thing behind the dark grey "outlines". What is it?
 
#22 ·
Well, I remember Rick Sternbach saying that the four protruding rectangles represent landing pads. Seems silly as in scale they are way oversized. But, for the big Voyager miniature, I guess it was added detail.

Of course, I'm glad you finally saw them!!! :)
 
#23 ·
John P said:
^Yeah, it was just a glorified shuttle that popped out of the part we thought was a torpedo launcher.

Rob, I hope those wings on the AeroShuttle aren't supposed to generate atmospheric lift, 'cause nothing with that cross-section is gonna generate anything but drag!
Heck, John P!

If 20th Century computers can handle making a brick like NASA's space shuttle glide to Earth anything's possible! :)
 
#24 ·
nx01Rob said:
Well, if we had aired the ship, I was going to refine the wings to be a little less "blunt trauma" to the aerodynamics. But when we got nixed, we moved on.....so, it stands as is. I've thought about refining it for next years Calendar, but now I don't think I'll have the time...

The only other original design that was also chopped (that I remember now)was the John Eaves Klingon D-6 or D-5 that I included it in my calendar image for 2006. It was originally done FOR FREE for ST:Enterprise by Koji, who stayed up 36 hours to do it for the show. It looked great, but then the "producer(s)" said, "put more windows on it". We said no (You have to understand that we did so much extra, that at that point it was the straw that broke the camels back when they were being mindlessely trivial and unappreciative). So, in there infinite wisdom, they choose to use a lo-rez K'Tinga model (from a timeline over 100 years later) we had lying around. Because that was much more logical than a ship that needed 10 more windows that no one would EVER notice!!!! E boy...
Hmmm wonder if any of those Einsteins ever considered the fact that the TOS D-7 had ZERO lighted windows! :rolleyes:

But continuity and making stuff look pre-TOS like was never high on the producer's list of priorities.

It's truly a shame that the work product of so many talented artists had to be okay'ed by someone who had little literary vision - muchless artistic insight or vision! :(

Fantastic Aeroshuttle!

Any chance we might get to see a bunch of high-res true orthos and perspective views of the John Eaves/Koji D-5(or whatever the number might have turned out to be)?

I also know of a certain 3D modeler(hint - FourMadMen) who is looking for a good 3D model of it, if you know where he might be able to come across such a monster.
 
#26 ·
nx01Rob said:
Well, I remember Rick Sternbach saying that the four protruding rectangles represent landing pads. Seems silly as in scale they are way oversized. But, for the big Voyager miniature, I guess it was added detail.
Well, maybe the surface area of the rectangles represent just a landing skid? Nothing saying the whole foot has to be a block that big! :)

nx01Rob said:
Of course, I'm glad you finally saw them!!!
And once again,
THANK YOU!!!!!!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top