# AMT DN Refit Underway



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I've been working on this for about a week now; parts for a Dreadnought laid out. DN parts are from VA Miniatures, B/C Deck, Lower sensor array, main deflector dish, warp engine front intakes and assorted small parts from DLM. Split impulse deck and Bridge module from PNT.

Various modifications completed before today; today's work was the puttying of the random wood-grain like patterning the model picked up from it's second release onwards. It will take some time to remove the patterning. LOTS of puttying. I am aware that the conversion does not address that the secondary hull will be 1/2" too short in this scale, but I am not going to fix that with this model.

I've decided to forgo a saucer shuttlebay and lower saucer deflector array for this model. Consider it an "as designed" early build, if you will. The only concession to the lack of saucer mods is the split impulse deck; a stock Refit impulse engine would get in the way of the extended dorsal that supports the third engine.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Looks like a fun project in store!


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Here's a challenge: The Franz Joseph TOS dreadnought has a larger secondary hull. I'd love to see somebody enlarge the refit hull accordingly.


----------



## Paulbo (Sep 16, 2004)

John P said:


> Here's a challenge: The Franz Joseph TOS dreadnought has a larger secondary hull. I'd love to see somebody enlarge the refit hull accordingly.


For the 1/350 Refit


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I nominate John for that challenge!! :wave:

The Refit secondary hull is so full of compound curves, I wonder if a whole new hull would have to be sculpted! I just can't see a plug for the existing hull working, but I could easily be wrong.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

If I could figger out how to do it, I'd have done it already!


----------



## Fozzie (May 25, 2009)

John P said:


> If I could figger out how to do it, I'd have done it already!


If YOU can't figure out how to do it... :freak:


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Fozzie said:


> If YOU can't figure out how to do it... :freak:


Remember, I can be VERY lazy if something seems to hard to do.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Puttying continues... sanding stages next. I'm just tearing through my tube of Bondo! Saucer top nearly done; maybe 5% left. One side of all three engines done and the secondary hull should be all done.

And... I found that the box actually contains a SECOND DN conversion and kit to use it on.... looks like I was mix 'n matching parts. The resin conversion kit was going to get the saucer shuttlebay and lower saucer deflector dish... the other kit - using the SFSM vac-form conversion kit was going to go "as designed/drawn" in it's simplest form.

Time to rethink my build. And get another tube of putty. :freak:


----------



## SteveR (Aug 7, 2005)

John P said:


> Here's a challenge: The Franz Joseph TOS dreadnought has a larger secondary hull. I'd love to see somebody enlarge the refit hull accordingly.


Maybe with plugs and clay, the same way that forensic artists do it? http://www.forensicartist.com/hep/clem/3drecon.html


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

John P said:


> Here's a challenge: The Franz Joseph TOS dreadnought has a larger secondary hull. I'd love to see somebody enlarge the refit hull accordingly.


It's not too difficult, really... just "sandwich and fill."



That's the Ertl kit, btw...

This took two secondary hulls, assembled and "sliced" into sections. I glued the slices together, and used white Milliput over the entire surface, in several applications. As you see it here, the secondary hull is finished, but the dorsal is barely started.

FYI, this started out life as the SFSM vac-form kit, but in the end none of the vac-form elements except the dorsal remained... and even that was dramatically re-created (I ended up creating a whole new surface for it, again using white Milliput.) The dorsal is actually nearly solid plastic... with the "skin" on top of that, and then the milliput eventually applied over the skin (which never quite looked "right").

I based my stuff on the dreadnought comparison blueprint poster from the early '80s... with the Federation(uprated), and also with the Ascension class (the Belknap-based smaller dreadnought). The aft-facing torpedo tubes, for example, come from there.

I noticed that your resin pylon/fin has phasers on it... this wasn't the case on the poster... the secondary hull had the same basic phaser array as the Enterprise. Though it's not hard to imagine a similar or modified ship having them there...

The Federation (uprated) also did not have the split impulse deck, though it does sort of make sense if you have a dorsal extension as this ship does...


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

CLBrown, I like the rear-firing torpedo tubes you did there! It's not a feature I'm going to add to my Refit DN models. Another acquaintance built his DN using the SFSM kit and also added rear tubes.

The pylon-mounted phasers are a feature of the resin kit. Certainly not a feature of the SFSM kit. This will just highlight the differences between both ships; the SFSM-modded kit will resemble the "as built/designed" plans (Federation Reference Series is my source) and the other- with the saucer-mounted deflector dish, saucer-mounted shuttlebay, split impulse deck, extra phasers- will a "fully-tricked out" type of ship. And she will be a later version, but I haven't decided which name/number she'll carry yet.

Also appreciate seeing how your extended hull turned out as well. But I'm still not going to add that length to mine; not since I've discovered I've doubled my DN workload and it's an incredible amount of work just to eliminate that darned patterning.

The kit using the SFSM kit will not get the split impulse deck; the one using the VA Miniatures kit will. Both models will get the better B/C decks, one using the DLM version and the other getting the PNT version.

I can get _USS Federation_ decals for one model, but the other model will most likely get markings from the PNT Movie-era generic decal sheet at this point in time. There just aren't any other ready-to-use sheets available out there.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Excellent Cary!


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

WarpCore Breach said:


> CLBrown, I like the rear-firing torpedo tubes you did there! It's not a feature I'm going to add to my Refit DN models. Another acquaintance built his DN using the SFSM kit and also added rear tubes.
> 
> The pylon-mounted phasers are a feature of the resin kit. Certainly not a feature of the SFSM kit. This will just highlight the differences between both ships; the SFSM-modded kit will resemble the "as built/designed" plans (Federation Reference Series is my source) and the other- with the saucer-mounted deflector dish, saucer-mounted shuttlebay, split impulse deck, extra phasers- will a "fully-tricked out" type of ship. And she will be a later version, but I haven't decided which name/number she'll carry yet.
> 
> ...


Well, the SFSM "kit" was a massive disappointment to me, unlike most of their other items (I love their Grissom, and their TOS Romulan, for example).

I ended up making my own bridge, because the vac-form bridge they provided had an incorrect shape, and the detail was very soft. I used an Ertl bridge as the basis, but rebuilt the entire aft end using sheet styrene.

They ignored the dramatically-enlarged B/C deck superstructure that the dreadnought-type ships were supposed to have, so I ended up doing this enhancement in very much the same fashion... sandwich-and-fill, again using white Milliput. I actually created a "rib" structure from the B/C-deck superstructure I'd removed from my Monoceros-class Scout, and using that as a general "shape guide" I sculpted the B/C deck region. Here it is, compared to the stock kit. It's subtle, but it makes a HUGE difference, to me.



(FYI, the enlarged structure was supposedly to support a "fleet operations center" just below the bridge, since the concept for the dreadnoughts was that, in wartime, they'd be the central vessels in fleet actions. The ship would be under the command of a captain, on the bridge... but the whole fleet would be under the command of a commodore or an admiral, in the fleet operations center on B and/or C deck. I, personally, envision this as being a bit larger than the bridge, two-tiered and still circular, to allow the fleet admiral, at the center, to see all the fleet-operations workstations in a circle around him, on both tiers. He, and his senior staff, would be in a "mid-between-decks" podium in the center of the room, with a big holographic "tactical map" at the very center.)

FYI, here's the poster-blueprint I was talking about earlier, which is my primary reference for this ship. Other references come from books like the "magazine," Starship Design" (most notably) and so forth. There were quite a few very high-quality ref books of this type made back in the 80s, pre-TNG (when Paramount "reasserted" their total dominance over all Trek-related publishing, and shut down most of the fan-publishing world).


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I never noticed the extra large B/C deck housing! It's in my Fed. Ref. Series drawing of the Refit DN, I just didn't make the connection!

I'll be darned!

Not too sure if I'll change that yet. I'm still way too early in the the project x2 to decide on that.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

I've sorted out the various pieces for each DN. The one shown in the first picture has had the lower saucer swapped out for one I had already installed the lower saucer deflector housing (a PNT part) - it needs to be secured in one corner better then the whole thing gets puttied. I've also changed that beautiful DLM lower saucer sensor housing to the PNT Abbe-type, which could be considered more having in common with the TOS style lower sensor array.

Pictures of the lower saucer will be coming later, in a few days.

The upper saucer has been almost completely puttied and is being sanded. What's left to be puttied will wait till I get the new DLM B/C deck in place. Thanks to CLBrown, I now know that this is still wrong. However... with *2* DNs on the table now, I just am not going to change it. Justification: The AMT kit is wrong, anyway! (man, that's pathetic!)

Modifications to the 2nd DN - which really wasn't intended to be covered here - have been started. I'll have to reinforce the vac pieces quite a bit to withstand the work and the stresses they will have to deal with later in an assembled state. A buddy of mine modified the dorsal to fit around the stock AMT dorsal, thereby fixing that whole strength/support issue. 

Definitely not being covered here was last night's discovery of missing pieces for my through-deck conversion. How much was missing? Everything below the saucer. I was nearly driving myself nuts trying to figure out where that box got to!!!


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

WarpCore Breach said:


> I've sorted out the various pieces for each DN. The one shown in the first picture has had the lower saucer swapped out for one I had already installed the lower saucer deflector housing (a PNT part) - it needs to be secured in one corner better then the whole thing gets puttied. I've also changed that beautiful DLM lower saucer sensor housing to the PNT Abbe-type, which could be considered more having in common with the TOS style lower sensor array.
> 
> Pictures of the lower saucer will be coming later, in a few days.
> 
> ...


Well, re: the B/C deck structure... just make it a ship which is not on the "list" and maybe treat it as a similar, but different, class. While the "Federation-class (uprated) Dreadnought" has the "fleet command center" there, it also has the enlarged secondary hull (with dual m/am reactors).

The ship you're building is SIMILAR to that, but has a smaller secondary hull (only one reactor), a smaller B/C deck superstructure (no fleet command center), a split impulse deck, and some different weapons hardpoints. It's clearly not the same class of ship.

Maybe the ship you're building is a "fast cruiser" rather than a "dreadnought?"

After all, "Dreadnought" does NOT mean "three engines." And there's no reason that a three-engine ship need be called a "dreadnought."

Personally, I never thought that the "Ascension-class Dreadnought" (with the "fleet command" functions but with much lower total power output) really qualified as a dreadnought, anyway. I'd have called that a "command cruiser," personally.

FYI, "Dreadnought" is a real naval term, and is really a subcategory of the "battleship" category. In general terms, a "dreadnought" is just a battleship with all the guns of equal (and large) sizes, rather than the distributed range of sizes "conventional" battleships usually carry. In other words, it's the "big guns" battleship, and (in real naval terms, again) was thus typically the centerpiece of a large fleet, relying on the supporting fleet to provide the smaller-weapons support, defending against smaller threats which it would be unable to defend itself adequately against. And yes, this would then TYPICALLY have been the HQ ship of that fleet.

In TREK terms, I always assumed that the extra engine was there to allow the very heavy ship to keep up with the rest of her fleet and to not maneuver like a sow in mud. The ship would be heavier, in large part, due to a much increased power generation system. That system, in turn, would permit the ship to fire highest-power weaponry at a nearly continuous-fire rate for long periods of time... in other words, making her the long-range-big-guns ship at the center of a fleet, much like the REAL "dreadnought" type ships would be.

Of course, this is all fictitious, so your mileage may vary... but I just choose to relate the "real world" definitions" to the "trek world definition" as closely as possible.

And as a result, I think your ship is likely not a "dreadnought" at all... but likely serves some other (albeit not totally dissimilar) combat role.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

With all due respect - your points are all absolutely correct - (and I am aware of the info on the original _HMS Dreadnought_) this still doesn't really change too much for me at all in regards to my eventual naming of these vessels. Chalk it up to "personal canon", if you will...! 

While I by no means have had access to everything in the way of blueprints, just about every blueprint I've ever did see has always referred to 3-engined ships as "dreadnoughts". And 4-engined ships were designated "battleships".... until _The Next Generation_ happened and changed _*everything*_.

In order to have a *proper* Refit DN, you do need more than just the extra engines. But the conversions available - by comparison - are cheap compared to actually doing the work necessary to enlarging the sections of the ship's hull... like you did. Even AW Studio's eventual Dreadnought conversion for the 1350 Refit isn't going to do much more than what the SFSM or VA Miniatures conversions did for the AMT Refit.

Your points are well taken and I thank you for your input. I'm still not changing my mind about what to refer to this ship class. :tongue:


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

WarpCore Breach said:


> I never noticed the extra large B/C deck housing! It's in my Fed. Ref. Series drawing of the Refit DN, I just didn't make the connection!
> 
> I'll be darned!


You're getting old, Barry! We discussed that a couple times in the past. I think the consensus between the two of us was that it just wouldn't be too terribly feasible w/o a major re-work of the upper saucer and B/C deck area. 


> Not too sure if I'll change that yet. I'm still way too early in the the project x2 to decide on that.


What did you do w/that extended secondary hull you had worked on at one point in the past? Also, didn't you have a saucer you were working on w/the PNT _Abbe_-style lower saucer mounted nav deflector? 

Regardless, been too long since we last talked. I need to fix that, methinks....


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Hi, Jeff!

I never noticed the enlarged B/C decks even some 20 odd years ago!! Although in retrospect, I think I noticed that the section didn't seem to look right in the top view and I simply never made the connection. Embarrassingly enough, I am not recalling our conversations on the enlarged B/C decks right now.. but we most likely did; there was very little of the AMT kit left undiscussed.

As far as that enlarged secondary hull went.. it was never mine; it belonged to a good friend of mine although in the interests of full disclosure, he gave up everything in that scale last year and I was the recipient of all of those pieces. I have NO idea where that hull went. All I recall about it aside from it's larger size, it has no real internal reinforcement and needs some major stiffening. Something I'm not sure how to go about.. but until it's found, it's all a moot point, isn't it? 

Some things have changed for me in the (literal) "talk" aspects that you don't know about. PM me first, okay? :wave:


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

Barry, build this how YOU like. Don't let some other Fanboy tell you you're wrong. Your not wrong,...you're different. ...and different is Good ! Opinions are like toothbrushes, everyone has one and there's no need to share !


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Ductapeforever said:


> *>SNIP!<*
> 
> Opinions are like toothbrushes, everyone has one and there's no need to share !


Indeed. 

And let's be respectful of others' opinions, even of we don't agree them. No need for vaguely insulting commentary. I don't think that CLBrown was doing anything other than what any other fanboy has been doing since the first fan crawled down from the tree....


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Yes, the Ascension Class DN always made me :freak: - it's based on the Belknap class, which has a _much smaller_ 2ndary hull than the Connie (and is a lovely ship in itself). But sticking a 3rd nacelle on a small ship did _not _make it a DN in my eyes.


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

Griffworks said:


> Indeed.
> 
> And let's be respectful of others' opinions, even of we don't agree them. No need for vaguely insulting commentary. I don't think that CLBrown was doing anything other than what any other fanboy has been doing since the first fan crawled down from the tree....


Sorry Jeff, no insult intended or implied. The beauty of this Hobby is we as Artists are free to build our interpretations. As stated above no one is EVER wrong, merely different.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

^You're wrong about that!


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

WarpCore Breach said:


> With all due respect - your points are all absolutely correct - (and I am aware of the info on the original _HMS Dreadnought_) this still doesn't really change too much for me at all in regards to my eventual naming of these vessels. Chalk it up to "personal canon", if you will...!
> 
> While I by no means have had access to everything in the way of blueprints, just about every blueprint I've ever did see has always referred to 3-engined ships as "dreadnoughts". And 4-engined ships were designated "battleships".... until _The Next Generation_ happened and changed _*everything*_.
> 
> ...


Not a problem... we all do this for fun, including the discussion of "what goes where and why" regarding the designs. There's no 100% "right" or "wrong" answer... especially since Roddenberry went out of his way to "cancel out" all the stuff we're talking about now anyway.

For me, a lot of the TNG-era stuff... especially during the first two seasons... is stuff I'm more willing to abandon and ignore than a lot of the "fannish" stuff that came along earlier. As you say, "personal canon" and all that.

We all love this stuff and that's why we come here... to discuss and to share. Right? There are some folks in any "community" who may have chips on their shoulders, and may want to exclude any opinion which differs from their own (and may want to drive away anyone who doesn't just bow down in submission... not something I've ever been good at doing!). But that's not where I come from. As far as I, personally, am concerned... I come here to talk about things I enjoy and appreciate. Including everyone's various takes on various fictional ships. Different opinions are just fine. Hence my "your mileage may vary" line, earlier. :dude:


----------



## Ductapeforever (Mar 6, 2008)

John P said:


> ^You're wrong about that!


Thupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthupthup!!!!!!!!!!!
Neener neener!


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

*ahem*..... 

No pics yet; I had some other matters to deal with in my modeling time last couple of days... but here's an update on the DN conversion utilizing the VA Miniatures conversion set, along with various DLM and PNT parts.

Lower saucer deflector housing stabilized, fixed window inserts. I have a resin portside saucer edge docking port to install as well before puttying starts.

Upper saucer: DLM B/C deck installed, split impulse deck taped into place but still needing to be glued. The saucer shuttlebay location is marked out but not cut out of the saucer yet. Nearly completely puttied.

Dorsal: Modded for resin rear extension which still has to be installed. The entire hull is puttied and the resin strongback/pylon part is glued into place. The pylons are puttied and some touch-ups to fill missed spots in the patterning.

All 3 warp engines are half puttied and those will be sanded before I putty the other side of the engines. Haven't really touched the small detail pieces as it's too early to work with those at this time.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

CLBrown posted: "...it also has the enlarged secondary hull (with dual m/am reactors)."

No...NOOOOO! You can't have dual reactors....! It would violate the dramatic impact of ejecting your warp core and having no power..... ERkGGGurgle!!!! Or was that only on Voyager? (Nevermind!)


----------



## Griffworks (Jun 24, 2002)

Barry - I haven't seen it and might well have missed it, but are you adding in "Megaphasers" to the horizontal pylon ends? That's what I'd done on oen of the two builds I'd completed. Maybe I'll even re-visit those builds one of these days.... 



Ductapeforever said:


> Sorry Jeff, no insult intended or implied. The beauty of this Hobby is we as Artists are free to build our interpretations. As stated above no one is EVER wrong, merely different.


_My_ apologies. I might well have been reading in to it.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Jeff, the Megaphasers that came with the kit aren't with the rest of the parts. I suspect I pulled them to be used somewhere else; just where I'm not sure. At this point in time, they are not part of this DN build.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Wow, get busy with "life" things and other distractions for a few days and I have to chase this thread down! 

Slow going on the project. I've spent quite a few hours puttying and sanding with more to go. The engines are going to need more attention soon.

But, in the meantime, this is what I have to deal with in the AMT Refit - well, anyone who's worked with one that wasn't the TMP version... What you see here took about 30 minutes to putty (I use a shaped popsicle stick; I guess I could have used something larger to spread more putty quicker) and about 15 minutes to sand. I forgot to remove the hull section that's going to receive the saucer mounted shuttlebay before I puttied the upper saucer so I'm scoring that section out now.


----------



## CLBrown (Sep 8, 2010)

WarpCore Breach said:


> Wow, get busy with "life" things and other distractions for a few days and I have to chase this thread down!
> 
> Slow going on the project. I've spent quite a few hours puttying and sanding with more to go. The engines are going to need more attention soon.
> 
> But, in the meantime, this is what I have to deal with in the AMT Refit - well, anyone who's worked with one that wasn't the TMP version... What you see here took about 30 minutes to putty (I use a shaped popsicle stick; I guess I could have used something larger to spread more putty quicker) and about 15 minutes to sand. I forgot to remove the hull section that's going to receive the saucer mounted shuttlebay before I puttied the upper saucer so I'm scoring that section out now.


I HATE those "panel details." The amazing thing is, when AMT first put out the ST-TMP kit, it lacked that detail... and someone at Ertl, when they bought AMT, thought that this would be a "value added" FIX to the existing kit.

Now, imagine if they'd actually done the real "as seen on-screen" aztec pattern. How much easier would life be at this point?

You're using the same putty I use for that purpose... and it worked out quite well for me. 

Here it is just before primer went on:



After primer, and a single sanding pass, the "bad" panel detail was totally gone. Squadron Red is my personal favorite for this task... though I haven't had to do this to ANY model in ages, now... and I'm still HOPEFUL I won't have to do it to the R2 1:350 TOS Enterprise. But if I do, Squadron Red is what I'm going to use, I think.


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

CL, thanks for your pic! Yes, there really only seems to be one effective way to get rid of those paneling details... putty, sand, repeat...

I lost power for about an hour this evening... we had a nasty storm pass through but ironically enough, the power went out about 20 minutes AFTER the storm passed.... so I spent some time working on the upper saucer. I see where I need to do some spot-puttying.

Now.... AFTER I cut out the saucer section, I test fitted the shuttlebay piece. I ended up w/ a large gap along the lower (and longest) edge. I guess the molds aren't that great anymore for that piece.... the gap was about 1/16" on the corners and widened to about 1/8" in the middle. I cut out a piece from the removed section about that large and glued it back in. I'll be doing a lot of test fitting to make it fit, I guess....


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Wow, tough crowd here....  Is this thing on? Hello? Hello?

Quick update: the long bit I cut out of the removed section glued back in set nicely. I got a nice smooth transition along the upper edge and sides but have some additional work to get the lower edge to fit better. The gap evident in the pic in the above post is essentially gone now. The "stepping" I'm still getting is probably due to the rough edges from the glued back in piece and from just cutting. I used a cutting disc (carefully) to trim out the piece going back in. Glued, set, and a change to the sanding drum to make things less ragged... and then a needle file to fine-tune the fit. It's getting there. 

Last thing done today was to re-putty the personnel hatches on the topside owing to missed spots.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

I do remember once buying a resin shuttle bay and accurizing kit that allowed the making of the Reliant from an AMT Refit. I waited several years before working on it (back in the 90s) and found that the resin pieces for the saucer had shrunk by a few degrees. I ended up selling it. Hopefully these new resins are shrink resistant.

I wonder if that is why your shuttle bay piece doesn't quite fit?


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

Warpcore, did you still want me to send you the pics of my smoothie? I kinda forgot to do that....


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

charonjr said:


> Warpcore, did you still want me to send you the pics of my smoothie? I kinda forgot to do that....


I forgot about that, too! Yes, please! LOL!


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

charonjr said:


> I do remember once buying a resin shuttle bay and accurizing kit that allowed the making of the Reliant from an AMT Refit. I waited several years before working on it (back in the 90s) and found that the resin pieces for the saucer had shrunk by a few degrees. I ended up selling it. Hopefully these new resins are shrink resistant.
> 
> I wonder if that is why your shuttle bay piece doesn't quite fit?



It is very possible that the part may have shrunk, by one means or another. Sure made me rethink the parts I haven't used "in the stash"...


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

Focused my attention on getting the shuttlebay section fitted in. I think I got it.... Both pieces need to be glued in; then I think the Bridge module should be installed before I give the saucer a shot of primer.


----------



## charonjr (Mar 27, 2000)

WarpCore Breach said:


> I forgot about that, too! Yes, please! LOL!


I'll charge up the camera. Ought to be able to get them to you in the next day.

:wave:


----------



## WarpCore Breach (Apr 27, 2005)

It's been awhile since I've updated my progress. Since then, I've managed to get more of it together and added some of the details. Here's where I am so far:



















I am going to be giving this ship a shot of primer very soon. I decided to go with the Abbe lower sensor array as the normal array that is usually used makes the area look "too busy".


----------

