# USS Federation- Dreadnaught



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

Well folks, after years of on and off work, I am finally done my refit Dreadnaught class- USS Federation. This has been the first Star Trek kit I have put together in over 18 years. And the forst one that I paid attention to some of the detail.

While not perfect, I am very proud of it and have it kindly displayed overtop of my desk here at home. Special thanks to Jack (Fookerpilot) and Jeffrey (Griffworks) for all of their advice and words of encouragement. I could not have finished it without it.

I am anxious to here your feedback. I hope you all enjoy it.


Scott

Sorry I can't figure out how to make these pictures bigger.


----------



## jtwaclawski (Aug 7, 1999)

Pictures are a little small.


----------



## Stimpson J. Cat (Nov 11, 2003)

From what I can make out it looks really good. Dreadnaught are one of my favorite class. Your pictures make me want to get started on my Star Empire class dreadnaught. I hope you can post some larger pics of your project. :thumbsup:


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

If I can't get bigger pictures posted here, Griffworks will be posting them on his site in the next few weeks.

Scott


----------



## Captain-Raveers (Mar 20, 2002)

Yeah hopefully we can see some bigger pics of that ship.

Trent


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Just 'cause I can't resist being correct, it's spelled "dreadn_*o*_ught" with an "O."
Literally, "Fear Nothing."


----------



## ProfKSergeev (Aug 29, 2003)

Dreadnaught with an 'a' is a valid alternate spelling - at least according to Webster's and the OED.


----------



## Ziz (Feb 22, 1999)

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dreadnought

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dreadnaught

Works both ways. To me, _dreadnaught_ "feels" right.


----------



## bccanfield (Nov 17, 2002)

*DredNot*

I prefer DreadNot. As in: "Dread not the hazards of paint runs, glue spills, torn decals, and burned out light bulbs discovered AFTER the hull has been sealed."


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Interesting. 
Well, the British battleship that the class was named for, and that the starships are named after, was spelled with an O. Being a proper name with a proper spelling, I think that's what we should be using. Unless y'all think it's okay to spell names differently for no good reason. Waddaya think Jahn, Steev?  .


----------



## terryr (Feb 11, 2001)

It's too teensy to see.


----------



## chuckman (Nov 25, 2003)

john p, you do know the british spell/pronounce things slightly different than us americans right? just double checkint

im actually interested in this model. is this the old sci-fi minis kit, or is it a scratchbuild/kitbash? or is it the new 2500th kit (seems unlikely, but thought id make sure)? im trying to build one of these myself with some other enhancements (rear torps, couple extra phasers, maybe some more breadth to the secondary hull to house a bigger warp core, etc)


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Regional spelling or not, it's a proper name, Chuhk .


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

It is the Sci-Fi mini's kit withthe refit ERTL. As for the spelling...Like Ziz, I prefer the spelling with an "a" as opposed to "o". Working on the bigger pictures. Also, Griffworks should have my write-up by early next week so he can pot more of my pictures on his site.

BTW, JTGraphics..thanks for the awesome decals! And John P. looking at your USS Belisarius, I definately want to make onbe of those. You are an inspiration.

Scott


----------



## fokkerpilot (Jul 22, 2002)

Scott, I saw the pics you emailed me. Absolutely awesome - 2 thumbs up!!!


Jack


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Vaderman said:


> As for the spelling...Like Ziz, I prefer the spelling with an "a" as opposed to "o".


 Okay, Skaht.  (this is fun!)



> BTW, JTGraphics..thanks for the awesome decals! And John P. looking at your USS Belisarius, I definately want to make onbe of those. You are an inspiration.


 *blush*


----------



## Vaderman (Nov 2, 2002)

Thanks Jack. That means allot coming from you.


Scott


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Note spelling

:hat:


----------



## Trek Ace (Jul 8, 2001)

What I wanna know is how you get "Shawn" from Sean.

I still hear many people pronounce the names (when reading them in print) Sean Connery and Sean Bean as "Seen Connery" and "Seen Bean".


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Never mind Siobhain being pronounced "Shivaughn." Crazy Celts.


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

I'd still like to see larger pics.


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> Regional spelling or not, it's a proper name, Chuhk .


Since it's an FJ design, FJ's spelling must hold sway. :devil:


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

Here are some larger pics:

http://members.aol.com/oberon1880/Fed_DN_by_SE.html


----------



## chuckman (Nov 25, 2003)

makes me want to build one even more now.......blasted pl nx-o1, getting in my way again.....


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

PerfesserCoffee said:


> Since it's an FJ design, FJ's spelling must hold sway. :devil:


 Then by all means, do!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

^^So it is written! So it shall be done!


----------



## Edge (Sep 5, 2003)

Really nice build! Had to wait for the big pics to
see what was going on, but it was worth the wait.

Edge


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

Okay, thanks for the larger pics. It makes me want to get to work on mine. 

But.... what exactly is so "Dreadnought-ish" about the FJ dreadnought, or, even more, the refit version? I mean, it's got an extra nacelle and that's fine and all, but doesn't "dreadnought" seem to imply that it's more heavily armed (at least according to one of the definitions Ziz gave). Where's the extra armament on the refit dreadnought?

Brad.


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

It is! See the diagram in my previous post. It's much larger and more heavily armed than a Conny.

The refit version is indeed lame, though. It's just an extra nacelle on a Conny. There's no way in the world the refit is a refit of the FJ Dreadnought; it's smaller and made of Enterprise components, whereas the FJ is all new, larger, hulls. I rationalize that Starfleet built new ships from scratch and decommissioned the old DNs, transferring the NCC numbers to the new hulls. Yeah, that's stupid, but saying it's a "refit" of a much larger and completely different ship makes even less sense. 

Not to say the Perfessor's buildup isn't excellent, mind you! It's a beauty!


----------



## StarshipClass (Aug 13, 2003)

John P said:


> Not to say the Perfessor's buildup . . .


*Sorry!  * :freak: 

I should have made it clear that I was just posting the link for Vaderman's buildup. It is not mine -- not that I wouldn't like to take credit for such a cool model!

(I feel inadequate to attempt a DN. I stick to scouts and frigates.)


----------



## John P (Sep 1, 1999)

Oops, and I'd have realized that if I remembered the first post. Sorry, Vaderman.


----------



## chuckman (Nov 25, 2003)

John P said:


> It is! See the diagram in my previous post. It's much larger and more heavily armed than a Conny.
> 
> The refit version is indeed lame, though. It's just an extra nacelle on a Conny. There's no way in the world the refit is a refit of the FJ Dreadnought; it's smaller and made of Enterprise components, whereas the FJ is all new, larger, hulls.


thats why my eventual build up will have 4 more phaser banks on the saucer, a pair of rear torps, and maybe another pair of forwar torps, as well as a modified, fatter sec hull.


----------



## Dr. Brad (Oct 5, 1999)

That's a good idea. I should at least add more phasers to mine!

Brad.


----------

