Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
August 30, 2010
Image Size
473 KB
Resolution
2048×1536
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
15,307 (5 today)
Favourites
196 (who?)
Comments
65
Downloads
1,162
×
Tarasque Battlecruiser Ortho by ILJackson Tarasque Battlecruiser Ortho by ILJackson
Model: HAI-14 Tarasque
Class: Battlecruiser

Height: 197 feet (58.6 m)
Length: 1,005 feet (306 m)
Width: 729 feet (222 m)

Sublight Speed: 22% speed of light
Maximum FTL Speed: 400C (one light year per 22 hours)
Range: 98 light years

Crew: 48 Officers, 420 enlisted, 30 marines or security personnel, 18 flight officers
Troops or Passengers: 200 max (100 comfortably)

Armaments:
1x Gauss Cannon (firing 1,000 lbs. tungsten carbide rounds)
6 x Forward Anti-ship missile launchers
2 x Rear Anti-ship missile launchers
2 x 60 TeV Particle Beam Cannons
4 x Twin-barrel, 10 Petawatt/milisecond solid state laser turrets (5 PT per barrel)
8 x Twin-barrel 60mm Extended Range Ion Defense Turrets

Armor: 2 cm multiwalled carbon nanotube mesh over 1-foot thick alumina and titanian carbide chobham armor.

Auxillary craft: 6 light or medium fighters (varies with purchaser) or 4 heavy strike fighters.
4 short-range shuttles

Avionics: Digital Optical Telescopes, Long-range Mass Detectors, Long-Range Electromagnetic Field Detectors, LADAR, Radar and Infrared Field Surveyors

(updated to correct two weapon mislabelings)
Add a Comment:
 
:iconhawkbri:
Hawkbri Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2014
I dunno... I LOVE the design of it... but you would think a Battlecruiser would be... bigger maybe? This is more of a 'cruiser' size.
game-craft.com/blog/wp-content… is a good start for ship sizes, as it's more realistic towards having a crew on such a... tiny vessel...? A ship of ONLY 58.6m would probably ONLY need... about 6 specialists, and STILL have room, comfortably, for a decent 5+ security/counter-invasion crew.
A ship of something 8 times the size, would only need a crew of about 40, and still have room, comfortably, for 20+ security/counter-invasion personnel.

And just noticed that I'm about 4 years late... so please pardon me.
Reply
:iconiljackson:
ILJackson Featured By Owner Feb 24, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
I use realistic military ship sizes for the most part, just slightly larger. There's no reason for most sci-fi ships to be as big as they are. They are resource wasters, oversized targets and grossly inefficient. Real warships in space would be more like submarines. As for crew that's about half to a third of what would be on a battlecruiser of the same size in the ocean, you have to figure automation clears a lot of the ratings out.
Reply
:iconhawkbri:
Hawkbri Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014
Technically, you also have to take into consideration the RAW POWER sources needed to use spacecraft capable of FTL, power the weapons and advanced targeting systems, and defensive hardwares, not to mention life-support for the crew. Things are fairly large in size, which is ONE of the reasons why our current SPACESHUTTLES are so large as-is for such small crews as well. We also have to take into consideration armor plating and bulkheads are going to have to be bigger, consistent with 'I want to survive this and kill the other person/group while I'm at it' philosophy. They WILL be like submarines, but it will be on a much larger scale. If you'll notice the craft from the EVE ship size comparision, the Wyvern is HUGE, for it's separate fighter and fighter bomber bays, not including automated drones, shield projector ports, docking ports, crew elevators, because how do you expect a group of engineers to go swiftly from 'bunk to battle readying fighters' in under 5 minutes, or go from bunks to each particular bay, not to mention so much other stuff... It's mind-numbing to think about it all, and what it all comes down to. The power generators in the future are going to vary greatly in size and power in the future from what we have right now, just think of StarTrek as well. The warp-cores, which are, at first, Nuclear power rods... The ones in the newest movies, although I do not like them, I can see that they would need HUGE power cores for such an advanced vessel at the time, and of so much power. I'm QUITE sure someone of your sci-fi knowledge must at least have seen both of the new movies? Elaborate engineering bays that are not ALL posh and pomp, but rather... mostly work and efficiency. It's not ALL about the looks...
You also may wish to view the CCP Games videos, several of the trailers preview a minor look into some of the ships, and another series: CLEAR SKIES, although fan-made, and... using a completely other game(ahem! Half-Life2) to simulate the insides of several ships, it is quite accurate for non-immortal or non-pod fitted vessels. 3 people, minimum on a battleSHIP, with a single remote-controlled robot, far as the entire series goes, and if I might say, the combat is fairly fun(ny) and realistically fun. You'll learn stuff and have fun at the same time!
I hope to spar words with you again soon!
Reply
:iconiljackson:
ILJackson Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
I think most of them are too large. They aren't taking account micronization or even efficient control panels. Everything that runs the engine room on the Enterprise can be run from one iPad. Also, for technical reference, the engine room in the new movies is a brewery, not an engine room....and they've admitted that the engine room you see in the movie wouldn't actually fit in the enterprise....and the tarasque is larger than the original enterprise.
Reply
:iconhawkbri:
Hawkbri Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014
ah, pardon me, I was only seeing ONE of the ship measurements... Comes from being tired before-bed, and from waking up. Yeah... sorry about the whole ranting.You can probably delete the comment prior to this one if you want.
Reply
:iconiljackson:
ILJackson Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
LOL...I was really confused there for a minute. No problem. The Tarasque is a bit larger than the original series enterprise and actually contains more volume because, except for the wings, its one solid block instead of a saucer section, spindly neck and spindly engines. By volume it probably has as much interior space as a modern day air craft carrier.
Reply
:iconhawkbri:
Hawkbri Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014
To be honest... one of the things that made me go 'blind' was the point defense railgun turret. It's a bit large for something of 'point defense' isn't it? I still think the craft from EVE, even the smaller ones, designated as Cruisers, Destroyers, and Frigates, would be able to easily handle these one to one, as they're able to put out more power and deal more turreted damage, as well as put out their own point defense missile system, and drone bays. As for having as much volume in interior space as an aircraft carrier... I doubt it. If they did, they'd be venting atmo, and that's NOT good, haha
Reply
:iconiljackson:
ILJackson Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
I meant volume in the mathematical sense. If you closed off the entire thing and made it a big box. As for the point defense turrets. I don't think so. Also, there's going to be variability in design from one ship to another, so you're going to have competing design philosophies. Some of my ships have rail guns for point defense, some have ion turrets, some have lots of turrets and some have advanced fire control. It's going to vary just like it does in the modern world, only moreso because you've got large populations, meaning more design philosophies, some of them not even human.

One of the problems with sci-fi ship debates is that people forget that there's going to be a huge variety and difference in philosophies of design...as many as there are designers...and not all of them will be the best. In fact, they shouldn't be the best. You should never, ever try to design a perfect ship for a sci-fi setting. If you succeed, you've just killed your story. Nobody wants to read about a Mary Sue ship that's perfect. 

Whenever you think to say "would this system be better?" Stop. Then stop thinking like an engineer and start thinking like a writer. Why does the enterprise have that big bubble of a bridge on top for enemies to shoot at? Or those exposed nacelles. Why don't the crew wear spacesuits into battle? Why don't the integrity fields keep people from getting sucked out? Why don't they have automatic transport systems that immediately beam you back on board the moment its detected that you got sucked out? Why use photon torpedoes when, by the show, old style nukes do more damage (Balance of Terror). 
Why not get the Millenium Falcon overhauled by a professional rebel engineering team? 
Why not put point defense turrets around the docking bays of the battlestar galactica since the favorite cylon tactic is to ram it?
You never, ever want a perfect ship. Its bad writing.
Also, Eve ships better be able to take out mine. They're a few thousand years more advanced. My ships are 400 or so years into the future. They should be about competitive with maybe battlestar galactica in tech. They use energy weapons, but they also use a lot of bullets. And if you notice, there are no shields. None. Only a couple alien races have them. Any firefight is hell. Its destructive. Your ship gets screwed up. Everyone wears a spacesuit into battle with a tracker so the rescue shuttles can get them. 
My ships shouldn't even be able to handle federation ships. Because that's not the story I'm writing them for.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconhawkbri:
Hawkbri Featured By Owner Feb 25, 2014
Which enterprise? The U.S. Naval Carrier or the StarTrek one for the series Enterprise, or the Enterprise that Kirk flew? And yes, I know, a lot of the new movies' views of the engine rooms were just too damn large to have fit into such small vessels, although they were realistic in size. What you're not taking into account is the requirements for JUST the engines, which are MASSIVE amounts of energy.
Also: here's a StarTrek ship-scale page I found a minute ago: www.phan.org/sto/pics/ShipChar… which is closer to what the previous 40 years of StarTrek before the newest movies came out are like. I'd say just about the whole of the size comparisons for the engine rooms were very decent, and no, your tarasque is NOT 'larger than the original enterprise'... Please do your studying. The Enterprise BEFORE Kirk was 225m, captained by Jonathan Archer.
In any case, I could see a Griffin from EVE Online, a Frigate of some barely 63m from top to bottom, and hardly 10m large, and maybe 20m wide from port to starboard; would wipe the floor with your Tarasque, not due to it's size, but it's capabilities and although lacking any REAL gunnery, outside of a railgun or missile launcher, will shut down your Tarasque using Electronic Warfare, and in fact, I have used one to shutdown vessels of 200m and larger, forcing them to remove themselves from the field, or if they're really unlucky, they'll be completely unable to flee with a Warp-field disruption device, a localized one-ship target hardware which fits easily under the hull of the ship and simply requires one of the relays on either side of the vessel to be used... to continue, if there are more than just this vessel on the field, your Tarasque will swiftly be a dot of dust in the cosmos. Now... as for Battlecruiser class of vessels, the Drake-class Battlecruiser, known for it's HEAVY Missile launch bays, is huge BECAUSE of ALL the THOUSANDS of missiles it is meant to carry AND launch in a SINGLE deployment, and with 7 or 8 launchers depending on the 'is it a Navy or is it a Standard' edition vessel, can launch between 36 and 40 missiles per launcher, per rack of missiles, depending on the launcher and class of launcher, but most crews and captains tend to have the highest value launchers, with 7 or 8 launchers per vessel. That is a LOT of damage. The Drake is a 513meter long battlecruiser, able to hit FTL of 2.5AU/s at Warp, where it's tank, although usually a passive, instead of active as the Star Trek series vessels are, is almost ALWAYS very tough and takes MANY lightly armed, or still-several vessels heavily armed to take it down. Your Tarasque is a footnote as a Frigate-class. 

I also forgot to mention: Drake crew compliment, pre-capsuleer, is about 500, and that number can be lowered by a fair bit with a Capsuleer on-board to control the vessel.

It's not about the size, it's about the realization of realism. You can't fit that many crew in such a tiny vessel and be effective, and it's not truly a 'battlecruiser'. If a Drake, a vessel of 500+ meters(513exactly), only has about 500, how do you fit the same amount of crew AND 100-200 passengers 'comfortably' aboard a ship of... 58.6m... Make the Tarasque 10 times larger THEN you add in the crew and passengers, as you could hold over 300 extra passengers and the 500 crew compliment in the drake, easily, with room to spare for the missiles.
Reply
:iconxvampir3:
Xvampir3 Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
the design is great but people needs to let go the Elite model.... 
Reply
Add a Comment: