Saladin Class (Full Breakdown)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 вер 2024
- Well, here is the one you have all been asking for and its finally delivered. The single nacelled Saladin Class destroyer is detailed on this episode of Trekyards. Hope you enjoy it!
Main Website:
www.trekyards.com
Support Trekyards on Patreon:
/ community
Want cool Trekyards Merchandise? Check out our TeeSpring store:
teespring.com/...
Trekyards Discord Server: / discord
Eaglemoss Link: click.linksyner...
Discount Code: TREKYARDS for 15% off orders of $50 or more
Star Trek Mission Crate discount link: lootcrate.com/t...
Discount code: TREKYARDS to save 10% off your order
Other UA-cam Channel:
Captain Foley's Channel
/ @stuartfoleycaptainfoley
Social Media:
Main Trekyards Facebook Page:
/ trekyards
Main Fleetyards Facebook Page:
/ fleetyards
Trekyards Model Building Showcase Facebook Page:
/ 525656090901951
Team Trekyards Star Trek Online Facebook Group:
/ teamtrekyards
Star Trek Timelines (Trekyards Facebook Team Page):
/ 836643756447057
Love those Franz Joseph starships. So much better than what Paramount and CBS have come up with. They fit aesthetically perfectly alongside the original Enterprise.
I remember seeing the USS Saladin in one of the 80s DC Comics Star trek run. Kirk was the captain and it was a story recalling him being transferred from the Saladin as the new captain of the Enterprise.
I remember that.
Continual praise for Franz Josef designs! I liked the single nacelle ship ever since it's reveal in 1975.
In my head-canon, the Saladin was the precursor to the Kelvin.
I honestly think it's just a smaller version of it
My head cannon explanation for how/why the Saladin can get by on only one nacelle: nacelle pairs were never a requirement for warp, but did provide a significant efficiency boost and the ability to alter course at warp by altering the field intensity on one side or the other. So the Saladin and other single nacelle ships are cheaper to build, but aren't as fuel efficient and would have speed disadvantages in that even minor course corrections would require dropping out of warp, repositioning the ship and then re-engaging. So they're totally unsuitable for exploration, but perfectly adequate for border patrol and general duty in established Federation territory where they're never all that far from a starbase.
I agree with everything though i think the Saladin would use less fuel witch is one more reason for Starfleet to mass produce it
I agree with that... Since it didn't have to be so fast..
Since it was just a patrol vessel.
@@scoutguard3015 It wasn't "just" a patrol vessel.
Why would it be less fuel efficient? Nacelle pairs WERE once ALWAYS a requirement for warp because the nacelles before the Constitution class weren't powerful enough to produce a stable field on their own. That is clearly established canon. They simply weren't powerful or large enough at the time. But the tech and the warp coils improved over time and could now handle the energy requirement to produce a stable field. Especially with the "TOS" refit nacelles. I agree with what's said in the video. It makes sense. A specialized computer taking care of fine tuning the warp plasma and such to keep the field stable. Makes sense.
And why would it not be able to turn? We don't know how ships turn at warp. There's been no established tech canon for that.
@@poseidon5003 In what way were nacelle pairs clearly established canon? There is in fact an episode of Enterprise where one of the nacelles is damaged and they discuss what would be involved with going to warp with only the one operational nacelle.
Overall, I did preface everything I said with head canon. It's pieced together from various apocrypha such as the technical manual and making inferences based on what we've seen in the shows/movies over the years.
There was a Saladin or Hermes class ship on a monitor in TMP (or WoK?) so that does establish it as canon. Later there was the Freedom class in the Wolf 359 aftermath. Then the Kelvin in Star Trek '09. So clearly single nacelle ships exist, but to me there must be a reason for them to be so rare - namely that for most use cases we see on screen, two nacelle ships have distinct advantages that justify what would very obviously be a more material intensive construction.
As for why I think two nacelles would be more fuel efficient... so again this is just my extrapolation, but the technical manual talks about how the two fields interact when taking the ship to warp. Since single nacelle ships are clearly possible (since they definitely exist and no amount of whining will change that), then there MUST be a reason the vast majority of ships use two nacelles. My assumption then is that this field interaction has a synergistic effect.
As for the course change thing, the technical manual mentions that the varying of the two interacting fields is what allows for course changes at warp -- though in complete fairness, from an intuitive standpoint anyway, this would only account for lateral changes parallel with the positioning of the nacelles (ie, left or right), and would require a 3rd or 4th nacelle perpendicular to the others to account for the other axis.
Don't forget the design lives on in the Freedom, Prowler, and Vanguard classes.
Good episode. Never cared for the "dual nacelle rule" anyway. The Saladin makes sense as a quick n dirty way for Starfleet to churn out vessels. The only mod I'd make would be to beef up the aft end of the saucer (like the Miranda) to make room for more gear. Still, Franz Josef rocks!
I'm intrigued by the single nacelle starship. Nothing against the two warp nacelle ships and in fact the Excelsior is my favorite. I'd like to see more Saladin class starships in Star Trek.
Even though the defiant is my favorite my previous ship was the Saladin class... Since it had a single nacelle so it really interessed me
I can live with the various explanations for a single nacelle. My biggest issue with the Saladin is the lack of shuttle bay, even a drop down bay like the NX01 would be better than no shuttle bay, given how problematic the transporters can be. I like the various attempts to add one to the craft.
A small internal hangar (like the defiant) could be a option
Having the deflector almost directly in front of the Bussard collector really bugs me. It seems like it would interfere a lot with the functioning of the latter.
ENT series the NX-01 could maintain low Warp with 1 damaged Nacelle, I believe it was WF 2.5 plus or minus.
I know a lot of people treat this ship as "underwhelming" but honestly I love it. I think it's perfect for what you would want a smaller ship for, system patrols and training and cruiser/convoy escort duties. Considering the much lower cost of building these over the larger Connie's, I find it a functional ship in a needed field of operation.
The Saladin is my favorite TOS era ship class.I do wish the ship was used more in Trek shows or movies.
The more I see it, the more it grows on me. I just noticed it in the Kitumba episode of Star Trek - New Voyages. It's next to the K7 space station early in the episode. Great shot! :-)
Yeah it's kinda cute, like the Daedalus Class
One of the single engine classes did appear on one of the monitors in TWoK. Along with one of the 3 engine dreadnoughts.
When I mail-ordered my first, (treasured), copy of Franz Joseph's Starfleet Technical Manual at age 9 in 1978, my first thought upon seeing the Saladin/Hermes classes was: 'Where do the shuttlecraft dock?'...🤔
I always thought that considering that the saucer sections were very modular, to use for multiple starship designs, the single engine could be "Easily" upgraded with a secondary haul to become a Constitution Class. Which could also be a reason for the Constitution Classes that have out of order registry numbers.
Interesting video.
My headcanon is now that the Saladin is an experimental design to reduce the material costs of the fleet.
But due to observations during its first run it soon was considered sub-standard and would be replaced with the Miranda class (or a design with similar elements, two nacelles and a saucer-addon)
Edit: First? Yay!
Which raises an interesting question. How do you reduce the cost of a ship when there's no money??? There has to be some sort of currency. Right?
@@lukerope1906 MATERIAL COST... as in less material used in the building of the ship. The Saladin (and the Miranda class) lack the engineering section of the Constitution. So, eyeballing it, I'd say you can build perhaps two Saladins with the material it takes to build a Constitution. (Or 1.5 Saladins instead of a Connie, somewhere in that Ballpark anyway)
Also there are Federation credits.
My interpretation of the whole "No money" lines spouted in TNG are actually only a heavy hint that amassing riches is not necessary anymore to live comfortably due to automisation and replicator technology.
@@Tezunegari okay I can see that
Joe Kerr there was money at least during the TOS era.
@@DrewLSsix If there is no money the only possible government would be communism, which would make Spock's love of the communist ideal "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one" make perfect sense. If there is no money the Federation can only be communist, and their embracing of "the needs of the many" makes them every bit as dangerous as Hitler or Stalin. "The needs of the one outweigh the needs of the few, or the many" is the American ideal... individual liberty. Spock's quote is the expression of the communist ideal of Hitler & Stalin "if some must be sacrificed for the greater good... so be it".
Gene Roddeberry was just plain delusional when it came too his understanding of the world and history.
I always liked this design and it seems extremely logical. If there are something like 12 Constitution class ships in the fleet during the original series, then there should probably be 30 or so Mirandas and maybe 100 or so Saladins, and IMO that should be it. All these variants never made any sense to me. Why would you ever have more than 3 or 4 classes of ship going at any one point in time? Just seems inefficient when you could instead have 3-4 proven designs and just build lots and lots of them.
As for the shuttle bay, I saw one version of the Saladin with the shuttlebays in the side of the hull, P/S aftsections. That seemed a way to get the shuttle bays in without modifying the dorsel hull or elsewhere.
Has it ever been addressed that in the Franz Josef diagrams that the secondary hull is clearly the more curvy, barrel-shaped version from the refit and not the much less rounded, more cylinder shaped version from the original series, but the saucer and warp engines are from TOS?
Good catch! That clearly is the refit lower body that is more bulbous!
17:05 Weird.. You're right, looks really close to the refit (although the schematics predate TMP afaik).
Franz Joseph's designs always fascinated me. As well as the Fasa ships. They really did give a robust feel to Starfleet.
This is awesome and very weird! I'm relatively new to your channel and I spent some time looking through your past videos, just the other day, to see if you had a video on this ship!!! How crazy is that!!! Anyway I like this ship, even if its soft cannon, because it captures the simplicity of TOS era ships. Thank you so much for this videos, I've been craving good Star Trek content and have found it in your channel!!!
Fun video. I'm sure there's people down in the comments that have turned their noses up at it already because of the rules that were created after Franz Josef's work, and choose to ignore the reasons why they were put there, and that's fine. Myself, I prefer to have a wider array of designs out there, (not necessarily some of the more out there FASA designs, but definitely those in the technical manual) that build off the core components of the Constitution class.
I like the Saladin and Hermes and Ptolemy classes, and the Federation class. Task specific designs to complement the more general purpose Connie, each with a role to play in the Fleet. None of them feel out of place in TOS and almost certainly would have shown up in Phase II had it happened, and probably in the later works had the rules not been added.
The Franz Joseph ships fit in perfectly in TOS aesthetics. The FASA Larson and Loknar are a couple of great ships as well that look just right for their era.
Great job guys.I love your videos.I think the single nacelle ships were built because in the beginning of the Federation they needed a lot of ships and a design that is cheap to build.So they used the saucer and single nacelle design for cheap fast production.
I never was able to find any models of this fascinating vessel; a 1/350 scale model of this ship would be AWESOME SAUCE!!!
My favourite of the Franz Joseph designs. I've started making my own kitbash of one that I had showed Captain Foley months ago. But I haven't been able to finish it, yet.
Bring It On and share pictures! It is a cool design I would like to make one myself.
@@Blade_Runner_79 Not sure how best to share photos on here.
Sorry, Im a old fart that grew up with the tar Fleet Technical manual but I have never bought into the single engine designs. Technically the Dreadnoughts could still be built but they should only have the two warp nacelle's per Rodenberry's original requirements.
The Ptolemy tug with its twin nacelle's would make a great destroyer and maybe was origin of Miranda class. There was also a design similar to the Saladin refit that had two of the Constitution refit warp nacelle's side by side.
You are correct! Roddenberry's Cannon Trump's everyone else's, end of story. I don't care who created the design or wrote a book about it or designed a game around it, the entire universe only exists because of Gene Roddenberry, and is reasoning doesn't matter, if he says they have to be in pairs to have warp speed then that is the last word. That doesn't mean this could be a very good planetary defense ship or in her system ship that runs at near light-speed, that still would be very helpful and a single-engine ship with a lot of armaments would be great for this purpose. Just go by the word of the man that created the whole universe, you can't get more Cannon than that.
YES! One of my favorite ships in trek. I particularly love the refit version of it. I remember using this ship a ton in a Trek game long ago where it was listed as a DDG. Missile spam for days xD
1 Nacelle: Warp 8.0 (Saladin/Hermes)
2 Nacelle: Warp 9.2 (Miranda/Constitution)
3 Nacelle: Warp 10 (Federation Dreadnought)
4 Nacelle: Warp 10.28 (TOS Era Constellation)
All using the TOS Warp Scale of course.
My Dad had a custom kitbash of one of these. I wish I still had it, but it got lost years ago. :(
And I will note that the dish is referred to as primary *sensor* in the original diagrams, as all dishes were until Next Generation came along and the story needed the red Blobby thing to be a sensor a deflector a tractor a temporal stream conductor among other things.
But anything on old Trek that looks like a sensor, that's what it is. I know people don't like to hear that because that's when things made sense, but for 20 or 30 odd years the common sense answer was the truth.
(And if your folding space through warp and not physically traveling through the space in between anyway there is no need to "clear space in front of you with a deflector".)
That is a TNG creation, so after the fact some creators said "sure the dishes were deflectors...sure..." trying to make things match when people still cared about continuity.
Rather than the deflector grid that was created at the time, and just saying that later designs like on TNG Incorporated that into the sensor and communications array.
And same with the D7 battlecruiser, always was a gunport. Despite what someone says after the case trying to make things fit later stories. And obviously many other designs from Federation and also Romulan ships and the week explanation to that they're just concealed behind the hull begs the question, then *why aren't all* of them concealed behind the hull where they are less vulnerable? The whole argument falls apart. It's just better to say that in older ships they were a Communications and sensor array and a new ships add deflector was integrated and then everybody can be happy. But you can't insist that older Tech had attributes of newer Tech.
You can put lipstick on a pig...
I think it's pretty hypocritical, if you're going to ignore the warp engines have to work in pairs rule, why would you stick to this deflector dish fantasy when nowhere in Cannon orphan Roddenberry was that ever the case in TOS?
If we keep to the idea that it's not canon unless it's on the screen, then that also satisfies both people in that dishes in Old Trek were never claimed to be anything other than sensor in communication dishes, but we have seen in Trek where if you lose one warp nacelle you have no more power.
So dishes are dishes, and engines come in pairs, there's nothing that was said that you can't have more than two and we have seen three in Cannon. So just go by what's on the screen and it's all all of those issues.
Form follows function. It clearly was designed to be a sensor and Communications device of some kind. And later on they retconned this deflector dish nonsense to make it match the Next Generation. It's okay for the Next Generation to do that because it's all glowy and shiny and lit up and they make it do everything like a Swiss Army knife. But on the original show, they never refer to it as such, and as akmens razor dictates the most simple explanation is normally the correct one. If they're working space, they don't need to deflect anything. That was something invented later on and then tried to be forced on the older ships with communication dishes and torpedo tubes, regardless of what the artist say now because they are also trying to justify the old with the new. Why can't people be okay with just saying that was the way it was done in the original series and in the later ones they invented this deflector Gizmo that increased speed. But don't mess with the original series and what objects obviously were built to do. They even Show graphics where little scanning or radio waves are coming out of the dish in a sensor sweep. On-screen Canon is the purest Cannon.
Trying to make the original series to match everything about the later series is trying to cram a square peg in a round hole.
They do still travel at great speeds under impulse, depending on what you consider canon around .25c is quick enough to want some protection even if your hull is some super alloy.
As for warp, I think visual canon suggests that there is at least some relative motion involved. Ships can approach and fire on one another in most cases freely. If objects and energy can transition between normal space and whatever sub space bubble a ship produces when that matter is ships and that energy is beam weapons why can’t matter from normal space get caught up in a passing ships warp field? Still impacting at a relative slow speed once it shares the same space as the ship but energetic enough to warrant protection.
I do like your rationale though, and I have even figured that deflectors must be optional and that their use is likely dictated by the warp speed a ship can track or the environment it’s expected to work in. Most shuttle sized ships don’t have them.
@DrewLSsix oh that's an *excellent* point, I didn't even think to refer to the shuttles, runabouts, or even the warp sled that Spock used in the motion to catch up with the Enterprise.
The deflector dish argument falls apart pretty quickly, not that in later ships they might not have had a device that had that function, which made warp speed safer or when they change the warp scale, I can accept that as being just scientific progress.
But not putting all that heavy text capability back on ships that clearly that was not the intended use or function of what is obviously a variation of a large satellite or Radio telescope dish.
The refit is truly a thing of beauty, with the single-engine appearing very much like a rudder on a sea faring vessel. I LOVE the idea of a battle Scout! That is something that could operate in squadrons if a threat were to show up near Starbase one for example!
I have both the first and fifth printing of the Starfleet Technical Manual by Franz Joseph Designs which has the four ship break down. Now remember the game Starfleet Battles only uses the Constitution class, Federation class and tugs and ships based on them per their license. FASA took too many liberties and we know what happened. As a Starfleet Battles player from 1979 great video. Yes it is the dorcel that connects the saucer to the secondary hull or the single nacelle.
A THOUGHT -- if you ever re-render the TREKYARDS INTRO of all the spacecraft going past the space station ... perhaps add some SHADOWS onto the space station to 'sell' it a tad better. (Details, details, amigos.) THANKS!!
D.A.
Great Episode! Lots of great research, images and knowledge here! not a fan personally of the Saladin but I can definitely appreciate the compromises that went into its design!
Woo-hoo! Saladin! Nice one guys, we were ALL looking forward to this one 👍
So glad you guys did this. This class is one of my favorite classes of ST ships. Thanks for doing this breakdown.
Thanks for making this video, Trekyards. I never thought much of the Saladin-class design but now have so much more respect for it.
Frankly I would happily serve in any of these ships . Sadly we haven’t got there just yet as a species
Great episode! Thank you. The detail and care in these ship designs and the explanations they provide are one of the many reasons why I love the classic Trek universe. Keep up the great work!
I originally thought that the USS Kelvin (NCC-0514) was a Saladin class Variant as the registry number fits well with the Saladin production line.
The original 12 Constitution class Heavy Cruisers launched in 2245. Since then Starfleet commissioned 160+ more vessels of the Bonhomme Richard, Archernar, and Tikopai subclass ships by 2265. The original 12 are utilized as Exploratory Vessels while the rest are used for Border patrol and Military applications. All were Refitted to Enterprise specifications from 2273 to 2282 and several more ships were built. By 2285 the Constitution class began to show it's age and the first Generation of the class was retired around this time. The Vessels built after 2265 remained in active service until 2334. Many post-2273 Connies were still in the reserve fleet by 2368 and were undoubtedly recommissioned for the Dominion War. The USS Republic (NCC-1371) is the only TOS style Constitution class ship still in active service as a Training vessel.
If anyones interested in a licensed appearance (not necessarily canon) of the Saladin & Hermes Classes, they appear several times in the "Star Trek: Vanguard" novel series, especially the final two novels of the series...
Thanks guys. This is my all time favourite ship. I have needed to get a constitution kit and kit bash myslef one of these. I like to consider this the "Chevette" or "Pinto" of Star Trek.
Loved watching this and made me think of how the Akula class and Saladin would work well together much like the steamrunner and sabre. I do not know if it has ever been done here but the Akula class would be a great ship to look at.
Perhaps the ships with 2 nacelles is like getting a car with a V8 and the one nacelle is either a six or four cylinder
So, if it is possible to create single nacelles with "dual inline coils", as with the Saladin and Kelvin, _why aren't all Fed ships built that way?_ Smaller target profile, harder for enemies to hit, for the same amount of vulnerability (i.e., a nacelle gets hit, you lose warp capability)
Precisely, and proves the point that that's never how these engines were originally meant to work. If this one can have two in one housing, then why couldn't the Connie have for? Why did zefram Cochrane build all that complicated Machinery to extend engines outside of the housing if you could just activate warp speed with them inside, it's clear that they are designed to work in pairs and you cannot have both of those inside one housing it defeats the entire purpose of having opposing or synchronous energies working together to provide thrust as was described everywhere until the next Generation came out and then they invented warp bubbles and all kinds of other such Tech that didn't need to be forced onto the original series. What looks like a dish is a dish, what looks like an engine is an engine, and just please let that be accepted as how they created it. Form follows function as we are always told, and we can accept my TNG that they invented new things and they work differently. Don't try to force the new on to the old.
The reason is the same reason none of the Franz Josef stuff is considered canon. There was a falling out and all Josef's stuff that wasn't Connie specific was retconned to be non canon, with crippling and dumb (IMO) rules like nacelles must be in pairs, and have line of sight.
The result is workarounds like double sets of coils in one nacelle, and ships with no nacelles at all or comically, internal line of site via a tube between nacelles.
Some people treat those rules as gospel, but it's left several really good designs like the Saladin & Hermes and Federation classes out in the cold, and even designs that obey the rules like the Ptolemy class tug, aren't canon.
Less efficient.
@@PsychoStreak I cannot disagree with this more. It's precisely those types of restrictions which lead to more creative design. It also contributes to a consistent internal logic. And a unique star trek aesthetic. No limitation leads to more of the same traditional sci to ship ideas eventually.
Great video, I loved it.
Should have mentioned the Hope Class Medical Ship which was based on the Saladin frame. Same Armament as the Hermes, it was primarily more like an Ambulance than a medical ship, sending medical staff to colonies and other worlds during times of plagues and epidemics before a Daedalus Class hospital ship comes in.
I would agree. It is one of my favorite starship design. I have built a kit scout ship, U.S.S. Knott. Name is from the ship that Dr. Ballard used to find the Titanic. I have more drawings, pix and designs on my deviant art profile GLT1. It was a great discussion of ships we don't normally see in Star Trek. Keep up the good work guys.
Loved it guys. lol
Though, this particular class of ships has always confused the hell out of me, because of the different names it's had over the years. From the Saladin, to the Hermes, to the Apollo... even the Akula. But whatever it's name, the Federation Class I destroyer has always been a favorite. I don't consider it quasi-canon. Because it appeared in a movie, it is canon for me.
I have to say that I like the the shuttle bay designs, but I prefer the non-shuttle bay design. It's more what I've seen in the schematics.
Fran Joseph has to create the new class Nebula!
Star fleet needs to bring back the single nacelle idea. Imagine an alien race pressed for resources so they risk the reduced power to maintain their reach or use it as a tug boat with haul weight out weighing speed
Several years ago I went to the Huntsville Space and Rocket Center.
They have a very nice model of the Saladin Class.
One of the Fan-Film groups (Infinite Chain/USS Hannibal) used a Saladin Class with a modification to add a shuttle bay at the join of the neck and nacelle. As clean as the original design is, it never made sense to me that ships with lower registry numbers than Enterprise would lack obvious shuttle bays.
Pairs rule! 😂 Gene help us! 👾
I was always curious about the history of this ship. Thanks for the episode!
I have always liked this ship.
I know the dual nacelle configuration was considered "optimal," but I think any multi-nacelle ship could, in a pinch, rework their warp drive to utilize a single nacelle to at least attain some warp speed capability. It was a matter of "rebalancing" the engine and knowing how to program the warp computer. That would be the real trick.
I believe that it should be a warp 5 ship, not a warp 8 ship
I like Freedom class starship , it's single nacelle starship as well 🙂
AWESOME episode and AWESOME ship
the deflector dish positioning is horrible. move it to the front of the saucer like NX. you got a fine solution for the deflectorposition right there, why invent a crappy new one...
We discuss that and show the variants in the episode. Please watch LOL
@@Trekyardswebseries 16:00 yes those are certainly nicer solutions. still wishing i could slap the guy that came up with that extremely non-star trek looking original saladin dish in the 70s...
Just because you dont like it doesnt mean he should be slapped. (shakes head)
@@S1nwar
@@chivebacon9695 don't shake his head [sets phaser for stun] 😈
The "horrible" positioning was the solution envisioned in the early 1980's, decades before the NX solution (or the Galaxy-class styling) was even imagined. Also, there were no "warp cores", that was a Next-Gen creation. To _respect canon_ it has to be shown the way it was, when it was. Gene's 1990's assertion that warp nacelles "must" be in pairs was designed to invalidate Franz Joseph's design's (which he as arbiter of all things Trek _had to have personally approved in the 1980's_ ), because Paramount didn't own them. Mercenary and money grubbing. Yes, our idol has clay feet.
At this point, I can only presume that including unnecessary Oberth footage is a troll on the loyal fans. Well played, well played.
Thanks to both TNG All Good Things…. And Voyagers Message in a bottle both 1 and 3 nacelle ships are canon, but I think it’s best to very narrowly define their role in trek in much the same way that four nacelles ships are
4 nacelles ships are for ships mean for deep space where double redundancy in drive systems is essential.
3 nacelles ships are for purely tactical main ships
1 nacelle ships are meant for short term duration missions that do require a ship to be warp capable but stay very close to established safe places
A closely related ship I’ve always liked is the Apollo Class Refit fro Star Wars Legacy. It maintains the two nacelles (though no grill line of sight) yet keeps the sleek feel of the Saladin Class. I’d love to hear more about that ship!
Franz Joseph a fine author and illustrator from the TOS universe.
Star Trek Star Fleet Technical Manual (ISBN 0345340744) - 1975
The Complete Set of 12 Authentic Blueprints of the Fabulous Starship Enterprise(ISBN: 0345258215) - 1973
Star Trek Lives!
Yes a great author and creative mind, but that doesn't make his designs Cannon to spite his good intentions. They're interesting designs and I can see them being useful for some purposes but Roddenberry invented this universe and his word is final. And if someone was making money off of his intellectual property then is nice as the art is, it is just that, fanciful Notions of someone creating interesting designs but ships that cannot function based on absolute rules set out by the Creator. So this will be a sub light Cruiser meant for inner system use, even traveling at near light-speed that still would be a good ship with lots of purposes. But the great bird has spoken... This is my universe and you will go by my rules.
@@Blade_Runner_79 You are actually wrong about that. Franz Joseph was about equally influential over what is today called "Star Trek lore" as Gene Roddenberry was. All the cool stuff really came from Franz Joseph, not Gene Roddenberry.
Hi Guys!!! Saladin! Saladin! Saladin! LOL! Great episode! Thanks for all the hard work in getting it organized! One thing that does trouble me with the design is the seldom incorporated shuttle bay. Only having transporters would seem to be a nuisance sometimes. JJ-verse's Kelvin had a cool shuttle bay/secondary hull.
Probably could just dock a shuttle to an exterior airlock. Poor man's shuttle bay...?
@@carloharryman Yea, that's definitely an option. I liked the one picture of a shuttle bay on top of the saucer in the rear.
ahh starfleet battles lollipop... all the firepower of a heavy cruiser, half the power output and 3/4 of the defense, could not walk and chew bubblegum at the same time, but you were always careful around one moving slowly
2 Moon destroyers were not X class but Fast ships, it's even on the graphic you used. They used some of the warp tech that would eventually become X-calss warp nacelles on X ships.
Great episode on the Saladin class starship. I remember one design that had two nacelles side by side. How about an episode on the Starfleet Command ships Akula class and Okinawa class. Keep up the good work.
🖖😎👍Very cool and very nicely well done and very informatively explained and executed in every way and detail provided indeed 👌.
The reason the DDG was initially unsuccessful was down to the speed of the munitions, they were just too slow ( you only hit the target by accident )
With the introduction of "medium" and "fast" drone warp engines they became a much more viable ( and deadly ) vessel.
Paired with Scouts the ships were capable of hitting targets at extremely long range by using the "Long Lance" cruise drones.
Where did you get this information? If it's from a game or a license book I wouldn't consider that Cannon... I wouldn't use specifications from my early 90s Star Trek computer games and try to insist today that they are actually true, they just forgiven certain strengths for the game to play correctly. We have to be really careful about letting that smudge over into how a ship would work in real life. Not every Romulan warbird is going to take exactly five Torpedoes to destroy it like some game might say. Game rules really need to stay in the game Realm. Common Sense should Prevail elsewhere if there isn't any on screen Canon.
Where did I get my information?
From being a Star Fleet Battles player/fan for over 25 years (and is correct for that game universe )
Not my fault that people try to square peg/round hole information from one version of the franchise into another. It's all fiction anyway.
There was also a scout I think.
You're right, originally it was identified as a scout. There's been so much written since that contradict each other that my tendency would be to go with the original material. Anything made for games use later really shouldn't affect the original Canon. It's a small ship with one engine with a lot less Mass so it can go at decent speeds to spite just the one warp engine.
Like the USS Kelvin NCC 0514, without the secondary hull.
Where would the antimatter and deuterium storage be???
The one Nacell Wonder...
Good review not a favourite ship primarily just an odd type with one nacelle seems unbalanced. The deflector placement isn't great. I have a similar trouble with the TOS dreadnought which is a shame as I love that ship but it's dual deflector placements ruin it as well. The saladin ship defo would have a purpose as an escort vessel perhaps even as a base ship for a fighter assault group?
The aft dish is a communications array, not a deflector. It's supposed to be a command and control ship so being able to communicate with the fleet or Starfleet command and punch through jamming if need be necessitated a large physical array.
@@PsychoStreak Nice! didn't know that i suppose if a dreadnought was needed the last thing starfleet would worry about is how it looks and ensure it was practical as possible! Being able to have communications would be vital added with the dreadnoughts weaponry and power output would be formidable in battle.
The Kaufman Retrograde (SFB) was based on 5 of these destroyers...
I love the Saladin class in SFB. It can't walk and chew gum at the same time but it's a challenging ship to fly.
I thought warp drive is reactioless/inertialess. They dont need to balance against anything, or they would have to tip angled down towards center of masd like space shuttle engines.
I didn't think the logic of dual nacelles except maybe for resonance Stability, using destructive interference of two overlapping fields to smooth out tidal forces in the habitable part of the ship.
So this is supposed to fit 200 crew, the same armament of a Constitution, the same science labs of the Constitution, and all necessary engineering functions in the saucer alone? Seems a little improbable.
OK @ 11:18 when Cmdr.Cockings mentions that the secondary hull is more "expensive"... is that really the motivation for doing away with such a portion of a starship in other designs ?
I envision that the secondary hull of the Constitution class was not only to house a more robust engineering section, but for personnel/lab facilities, life support consumables and spare parts storage for long duration exploration duties of this premium class of vessel. To bolster the fleet for quick deployment and regular patrol, vessels without the secondary hull would suffice, being much closer to starbase support. Let's face it how many times did the old series and Motion Picture refer to the Enterprise being the "only ship in the quadrant" so fleet command deciding on an accelerated buildup and deployment of "less expensive vessels would be plausible.
I had a problem the other day with my magnatomic tap-off energy flow and burnt the toast.
The Hermes class scout and the Federation class dreadnaught made it into side-canon in Star Trek: The Motion Picture. In the second scene, as the camera is closing on the Epsilon 9 station, numerous voice transmissions can be heard in the background, and two of them are these:
"Epsilon 9, thei is Dreadnaught Entente calling, NCC-2120..."
"Scout Columbia NCC-621 to rendezvous with Scout Revere NCC-595 on stardate 7411.9. Further orders to be related at that time. Signed, Commodore Probert, Starfleet."
Entente, Columbia, and Revere are all listed in the Star Fleet Technical Manual, and the registry numbers stated in TMP match those from the Manual.
There are some errors, but overall an interesting look at Franz Joseph's designs and some fan-film/gamer improvements. Not completely Canon, but close!
Interesting you showed my favourite Hermes Class Scoutship, USS Columbia (NCC-621). The Saladin and Hermes classes are subtly different. In fact, the "Saladin" shown in Star Trek II and III is actually USS Columbia (as mentioned in a background subspace radio message).
Franz Joseph's Star Fleet Technical Manual listed Destroyers as NCC-500 series, while Scoutships are the NCC-600 series. Doh! --SLH
What about the Semi-Canon 24th Century-era Freedom Class cruisers? I know their design violated Roddenberry's cocaine and alcohol-addled, 'Nacelle Rules', but a wrecked example of this Class was momentarily On-Screen during the Battle of Wolf 359 'graveyard' scene.
You guys should give startrek legacy a look there's a bunch of cool TOS ships like a TOS version of the Miranda class and the twin vertical nacelle ship Apollo class there's a few more that are groovy including a twin secondary hulled 4 nacelles dreadnought
Question does this class of ship have a shuttle bay???
One of the few Federation starships I love
What ships do you usually love? And what do you have against Federation ships? I tend to kind of like Romulan designs because of the bird like design aesthetic that is very aggressive yet also kind of elegant at the same time. But I do appreciate the sleek and smooth look at the Federation ships as well.
And in my mind as originally designated a scout this would essentially be the federation's equivalent of a bird of prey.
Saladin Saladin! And I think the first time I've ever been the first to comment ever! Thanks guys!
Having played SFB and SFC, I like the Saladin class. I think the SFC rendition with two nacelles, sometimes called the Akula class, might be better though. Edit: better from an aesthetics point of view.
i love this ship
Could you guys do an episode on the North Carolina class mentioned here? I’m from North Carolina and would be interested to hear about a starship carrying on the name North Carolina legacy.
First, I was under the impression that the reason for 2 nacelles, was create overlapping warp fields to achieve warp speed.
2nd, how would there be space for there be room for both. Impulse engine reactor and plus the warp engines and a computer core, all 3 components take up large portion of the ship.
1) Could still be possible if there are two sets of warp coils or coil halves in each nacelle. However, I'm not sure if two nacelles are even necessary. They may help in field strength/density, and certainly warp maneuverability, but probably aren't necessary just to produce a warp field. In fact, I think there have been instances in some shows where a nacelle was busted and all it did was limit the maximum speed. Pretty sure that happened at least once in Star Trek: Enterprise.
2) Warp reactor was probably built into the nacelle. TOS implied this many times, calling them 'power nacelles' or 'antimatter nacelles'. Could be that the antimatter was contained in the nacelle and pulled into the ship, but I like the idea that the reaction took place within each nacelle. Doesn't work well when you think about the dilithium being housed in the engine room though.
Great episode
I would start running if someone called me his "Number One". I've seen 89s Batman.
A couple of thoughts here.
First off-- these ships were introduced in the Star Trek Technical Manual around 1975-76. At this point Josephs and Roddenberry were friends--and I believe that these ships were considered Canon.
This is when they were both mentioned and shown in the earlier movies( in STTMP first Epsilon 9 scene two scouts and a dreadnought ar mentioned by name and number in the background chatter.
Then (I believe) in the mid-eightys there was a falling out between the two men(could it be over ownership on these ships) and things broke down.
Only then did Roddenberry write his rules of starship design which, as far as can tell, were meant to remove these ships from canon. The rule about an even number of nacelles outlawed three designs(the scout, the destroyer, and the dreadnought) and the rule of line of sight between the nacelles outlawed the fourth(the transport/tug).
Thus by these rules-- the only legal ship in this book was the Starship class(later known as the Constitution class(oddly named in this book).
This makes it unclear as to if these ships are canon or not.
Reminds me of the freedom class from 24th century
Such an adorable little starship
An unconventional beauty ❤
One of my favorite designs.
Yay!!!! Saladin! Saladin! Saladin!!!
Always like this class Starship