im in the process of scaning them now should be uploaded in the next 30 Mins
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Them? How much stuff is it then? Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
top, side, bottom, 3/4's top view, shuttlebay, front aft, the one we already had the bottom front,rear torp bay view
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Oh. My. God. Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
BTW the Rhode Island is also in there might try to get these up tonight some time
[ August 30, 2002, 17:55: Message edited by: Akira62497 ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Wow! Nice ship. Really. Thanks.
(BTW, pictures ncc1 and ncc4 are the same, I think one of them should have been a top view. They're both bottom.)
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Your server eats ass. That being said, thanks for at least trying.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
Yeah the searver sucks but hey there they are
I FIXED THE ERROR ;-)
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
2 and 3 are the same, but otherwise
Many thanks!
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
There really is an ncc.jpg, but the one listed here is actually a link to ncc1.jpg. Go to the directory to get the real file. And yes, ncc1 and ncc4 are the same. ncc2 and ncc3 are not the same. Different file size and ncc3 was made because part of the nacelles on ncc2 were cut off. 3 is just a scan of the page slightly moved over than its placement for 2.
Anyway, great pics. I noticed Mojo used less greeblies, the standard Excelsior bridge and added what could be bussard ramscoops to the nacelles. Oh, yeah, no phaser cannons on the pylons right above the nacelles, the "shuttlebay" may not be one as the "doors" looks like a golden piece of hull plating with no "grid" to suggest a fantail door.
But pretty good!
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Alright, so who wants to begin the arguement about wether or not that's a shuttlebay up front? I personally say yes, it's a shuttlebay, merely because we have no other shuttlebay looking this on the Centaur EXCEPT for those two doors looking things on the bottom of the saucer that could be modern drop-bays.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
http://240sxs14.nissanpower.com/Centaur/tts_centaur4.jpg and one error that i see is there is no constitution impulse emitters on the miranda part between the nacells like the 3d model plus its missing some top detail
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
The CGI ship looks way better than the actual model. Maybe that Intrepid/Constitution ship might have the same treatment.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Well, Mojo did takes some personal creative liberties when he made the cgi model.
On the study model, I agree it is a shuttlebay, but on the cgi model, it may not because the "door" doesn't appear to have the clamshell "grills".
And what do you mean when you say, "there is no constitution impulse emitters on the miranda part between the nacells like the 3d model"? The only impulse "emitters" are the Excelsior impulse engines which is the same on both models. If you're talking about the weapons pod, what difference are you referring to? I see no difference in that area.
I'm going on a limb here and say the cgi Centaur is the same class as study Centaur, but is a variant or subclass.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Er, it is of course a bay (whether shuttle or cargo on the Excelsior is debatable) part. No one is arguing about that. But what is it on the Centaur?
Of course, that top picture goes to show that, as models of models go, this one isn't really all that accurate. Pretty, sure. Much better looking, really. But not exactly a perfect duplicate.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Oh, and the article answers the question of shuttlebay or deflector or what have you. It is a WALL for the bridge to HIDE BEHIND. This is the most brilliant thing said since ever.
Posted by Dr. Phlox (Member # 878) on :
Wow, those pics make it look really good. It doesn't seem so kitbashy even. Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
So, Mark what do you have to add now? And where's Mojo with his words?
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
I'm not sure I like this new CG model. It looks nice and all, but there's heck of a lot of liberties been taken with the original model. I like that the Miranda bridge was removed but some of the other changes seem excessive or unnecessary.
Is it just me or are the nacelles too short and thin compared with the saucer size?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
A few things...
THIS SUCKS MAJOR ARSE!
Why? Cause it shouldn't be in this fekking crappy magazines, it should be in MOJO's BOOK... we need to start a campaign!!
Oh, and it still doesn't clear up the question as to what was REALLY the name of the model? It doesn't say Centaur.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Oh, and if we take the red squares as torpedo bays, then they are going to be some FRIKKIN' large torpedoes, going by the bridge size - to size the relative size of humans.
They'd (at least the aft ones) would work as shuttle bays.
Or what about the two cyan coloured panels below the main impulse engines?
Andrew
P.S. The fact files suck... "This is the Centaur, it is a starship, it has nacelles and a saucer with impulse engines" Yeah, thanks for that.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:I'm not sure I like this new CG model. It looks nice and all, but there's heck of a lot of liberties been taken with the original model.
I second that. And I don't like CGI-'schematics'. I prefered the ship-drawings they used in the beginning.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Um... Where'd the windows go?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :
It doesn't bother me that libterties were taken. The original model looked like ass. Since all the DS9 kitbashes seemed to have been done in a hurry, I doubt if any of them "really" looked like the original models. This revised Centaur is perfect.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
Why don't you try to draw it as the pictures show it? I think with better painting the original kitbash doesn't look that bad.
BTW: Any news about the missing kitbash-pictures?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Spike:
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
Why don't you try to draw it as the pictures show it? I think with better painting the original kitbash doesn't look that bad.
BTW: Any news about the missing kitbash-pictures?
Actually, I was thinking about that. Doing a comparison between the two maybe.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Thanks for the scans!
Glad that most flaws of the kitbash were fixed - except for one: There should be a deflector dish instead of the two forward launchers. A bit more work to make the launcher look less like on the Miranda would have suited the CGI well - just like the nacelles were modified too.
The text, especially the idiotic remark abouth protecting the bridge - well, I never take too seriously what they are writing the Magazine.
Posted by Captain-class, Mike-variant (Member # 709) on :
grr.. they mentioned the miranda. the miranda obviously has nothing to do with this ship
st mag suxx!
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
But the "deflector" launched torpedos during the epsiode... My rationalization with this model is that it's the "pristine" version of the class. The pics and ship seen in "A Time to Stand" represent a beat up, jerry-rigged version of what the ship ought to look like. They had been in constant combat from three months by this point - some of the ships are bound not to have that assembly-line look anymore.
More to come - gotta wait to hear back from Mojo.
Mark
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
OK, about the photon launchers being too big on the front. That entire red thing isn't the actual launcher, it's the door the launcher is behind. The launcher itself could be the same size, it's just that the protective door on the launchers on the front are abnormally large. Heck, we could probably have 2 launchers per hole, which would mean 4 forward facing ones, but then again, that might be overgunning the ship.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
ill make you all some schematics Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Looking at the fwd view, a bigger concern with the fwd torpedo launchers would be firing without destroying their own lower sensor dome.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
When I built my Centaur style USS Midway, I had to use a Excelsior "B" saucer, but everything else is a cleaned up undamaged ship. I also gave the Midway a normal sized torpedo launcher and scratchbuilt new nacelle pylons instead os crappy miranda parts.
I'll try to get some pics of the ventral side this week. ...and ys, that is a shuttlebay at the front of the ship! the sabre and Akira have simmilar setups. STTM is only good for pics of ships: all the descriptions have always been crap.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
[ September 01, 2002, 09:11: Message edited by: Akira62497 ]
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Nice schematics!
I think that there should be something different instead of the two launchers which are exactly like on the Miranda. Preferably smaller openings and a deflector dish in between.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Well, the new model certainly looks nicer... but which is the 'real' Centaur? I think the original would look ok with a better paint job. I like the replacement of the bridge module but the torp launchers are way out of scale. Also the articles author obviously didn't have any bright ideas about the 'shuttlebay' in front of the bridge...
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
Guys im thinking the Centaur is the Size of the miranda look at the windows on the model and the bridge (i say its miranda scale not excelsior
Posted by Captain-class, Mike-variant (Member # 709) on :
well, then, you are wrong.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
yup i am
Posted by Captain-class, Mike-variant (Member # 709) on :
Disregarding this magazine nonsense, I'm working on a deck schematic based on the studio model, based on an Excelsior sized saucer. maybe by Tuesday.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Urrgh... If I didn't have a reason to insist that the ship is Miranda-sized or smaller before, I'd have one now:
The front view sucks.
With the Excelsior-scaled bridge hidden so completely behind the shuttlebay/protective thingamabob, this ship looks *decapitated*. And even if the "protecting the bridge" stuff actually made some engineering sense, it's psychologically a horrible mistake to have a bridge that doesn't have a view forward.
The whole point for having an external bridge on a Trek ship is to create the illusion that it has a view forward. If not for that, the bridge could be placed in some place that actually made engineering sense! Restoring the Miranda bridge would also restore an acceptable bow view.
As for the torpedo tube size... Well, for a 200m ship there's no problem. And as for the torps hitting the sensor dome... remember how Capt. Reynolds liked to fly "above" Sisko's Jemmie ship in the battle? Just say that his forward tubes were angled down, much like the Voyager's were.
For the missing greeblies, I can accept the idea that the Centaur was a somewhat patched-up veteran with features a freshly built ship of the class would lack. It's just too bad that no other major ship in DS9 was shown with similar "battle repairs".
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Hello, my name is Mark Nguyen, and I will now inform you about the history of the USS Centaur model. Point form notes follow:
[Note: There is NO NEW ARTWORK that I can show you. Seriously, no. Don't ask.]
-The model was one of several ships on Mojo's "list of ships to make in order to please the fans, specifically those guys on the Flare Forums" list. This list included, but was not necessarily limited to, the USS Centaur, the Enterprise-B, and the New Orleans class. The Centaur was to be used as a background ship in the Unseen Frontier book, though not necessarily as the Centaur herself.
-Credit for the model goes to Ed Giddings. Mojo was in charge of the project. I was a consultant, and my job was to find source material for the ship model, correct said material to what was actually on screen, and comment on the model as it took shape. This was as part of my (suspended) job on Unseen Frontier, in addition to various other consultant and creative duties. Anyway, UF went into limbo while we were building the model, and while it was mostly finished by that time, I didn't get to see the finished model until now. However, we knew that the model would be featured in the Magazine eventually. I had nothing to do with the writeup, thank God.
-I suggested scaling the ship up to Excelsior size, rather than down to Miranda size. My take on this was that it would more easily solve the problems of the impulse engines, shuttlebay, etc. After all, the Klingons were apparently able to scale their ships up, no? The saucer would have eventually been incorporated into the new Enterprise-B model.
-I've already posted about the pristine nature of the ship. Mojo wanted to have something sleeker and cleaner than the POS we saw when we got the reference pictures in. There are two possible explanations for this (you get to choose): One, the pristine thing, and the USS Centaur is just hideously battle-damaged and/or field refitted. Two, what we see here is a semi-refit version of the ship, incorporating later bits of technology. The dark triangular shapes on the saucer are deliberately emotive of the ones found on the Sovereign class. Perhaps they are some sort of improvement?
-I also recommended that the front superstructure was indeed a shuttlebay. At this scale, it would be much less of a problem than it it were scaled to the Miranda. Ed apparently forgot to put the ribs into the door... But in that case, I say just imagine it slides as a whole into the ground, or something.
-Class name: as I hinted at some time ago, we called it "Baracus-class". When we first saw the model reference pics, Mojo and I had quite a time saying just how ugly it was. I was the first to coin the name "Baracus" because of all the gold stuff and the resulting A-Team reference, and it sorta stuck while we were making the model. Of course it's not official, but I like it.
Not much else I can think of off-hand, as my job after finding the reference pics was more or less only to comment on this and that. Ed did all the heavy work, and Mojo was in charge and relayed stuff back and forth - Ed and I had no really direct contact. I hope this is enough for you guys for now... If you have any specific design-related questions, ask, and I'll see if I can remember anything else specifically.
Mark
Posted by Captain-class, Mike-variant (Member # 709) on :
I'm very happy now to say that we can consider this to be a post-war refit of the ship we saw in the ep. The bridge was replaced and the greeblies streamilined.. this allows both the studio model version to have existed in the episode and the CGI model version (which is a damn fine effort, IMO) to be what the ship looks like refit after it appeared.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Oh, and to rebut Timo:
-I believe that Roddenberry's "bridge on top" thing was such that the audience would know that THAT was where the bridge WAS, and not to have any sort of practical view. It's just another element to make the ship more relateable to the average viewer.
-The torpedo problem is present on at least two other starships - the Intrepid and Nebula. And with the former at least, we know on one version of the model that the launchers are canted downwards at a shallow angle in order to allow efficient launch. Perhaps the Centaur is a similar or early attempt at the same? Since the ports are so out of proportion, perhaps it's a bulky, arc-fire type launcher?
Mark
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Yah, the bridge doesn't actually have a window facing forward. The viewscreen can show any angle whether there's a wall in front of the bridge or not. It would simply display visual sensor information from in front of the ship.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Mark, can you give us any information on UF!?!
Oh how I want to see this book.
Can you relay some information to pocket books on how we desperately want to see this book. Maybe say it's not a tech book, but a picture book!?!
Andrew
I like the CGI version. I just wish that shuttlebay was ribbed... for Charlie Reynold's pleasure! Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
3 things:
1) What happened to the kitbash nacelles? OK, the red grilles looked silly, but the tendency over the last decade seemed to be shorter and somehow boxy (Galaxy-era, Intrepid, Nova...).
2) Who said the dome that looks like a Miranda-bridge is a Miranda-bridge? Take Elkins as an example: Just because they look like the jet engines of an F-14 they are generally concidered to be deflectors, right? If the ship is indeed Excelsior-size, it can't be a bridge module. And Centaur seems to be a very creative project of Utopia's engineer; shuttlebay on top of the saucer in flight-direction, strange nacelles, maybe the dome is the ship's arboretum? Or the whole upper thing with the shuttlebay is a detachable glider? (Remember Galaxy Quest? ) Whatever, I don't think the ship's bridge is on top of the saucer anymore. if the post-war Excelsior bridge is the standard configuration of the ship, and it had to be replaced, then maybe they installed something else on top and used the battle bridge instead until after the war, when they got the new one.
3) We should make Baracus as "official" as Shelly, IMO. Spread the information, brothers (and sisters?), we have a new class designation! Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
It's "Shelley". And I believe everyone has started calling the Shelley "Curry" class.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
I wouldn't consider the Miranda bridge piece as a Miranda bridge as such, but I would consider it to be a bridge. I'd imagine the structure to house a ready room, conference room, dunnies etc, as well as the bridge itself -- basically like most 24th century bridge structures. That would explain why the external structure is so big.
I'm not sure I like the Baracus-class idea. It sounds OK until you consider that Starfleet would've named a prototype ship USS Baracus. I don't buy it.
Posted by Captain-class, Mike-variant (Member # 709) on :
if you disregard the bridges resemblance to the Miranda, and make it two decks, it makes a lot of sense. the top (darker painted, on the studio model) part would be the bridge proper, and then the lower portion would be a deck 2 structure. this keeps with the measurements of the Excelsior scaling also, to make the one deck model part into a two deck bridge module. its especially helpful that all the existing size features are painted over (such as the dome, ports and docking port)
I still call it Shelley class for the Curry, BTW
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The torpedo (bright blue Quantum variaty, I believe) dropped down away from the ship and then went after the enemy ship. It never went anywhere the saucer or sensor dome.
The scary launchers are on the Southerland-style Nebula: the torpedos almost skim the bridge! What happens if the ship is in a rapid Y axis ascent? On Voyager we get to see the Torpedo launcher, Main Deflector and Warp Core right next to each other! Mabye that's why we see so few Intrepid class ships in the war with the Dominion !
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by The359: It's "Shelley". And I believe everyone has started calling the Shelley "Curry" class.
I know. Allthough something's wrong with the e, s and a on my keyboard, this was not the reason for the error. Just wrote a bit too fast. Posted by Felix the Kzin (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: We should make Baracus as "official" as Shelly, IMO.
LOL! Which is not at all! Same thing with Medusa-class.
quote:Originally posted by The359: It's "Shelley". And I believe everyone has started calling the Shelley "Curry" class.
That's probably because that's what the Star Trek RPG supplement Ship Recognition Manual Volume One: The Ships of Starfleet from Last Unicorn Games calls it. And at least that's an officially licensed work...
-FtK Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
But I still like to call them Shelley, Medusa and Baracus. Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I'm not sure I like the Baracus-class idea. It sounds OK until you consider that Starfleet would've named a prototype ship USS Baracus. I don't buy it."
Well, these are the same people who named a prototype ship "USS Akira". Not that I'm defending the name "Baracus" at all...
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
I still call it Shelley-class too. I like Baracus, and Medusa can stick too.
More answers to come, but there really isn't much more to say.
Mark
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Regarding UF: Still don't know. We've been holding out for a long time, but as it stands it's looking less likely with each passing month. Mojo continues to investigate options.
Regarding the bridge: No one really thought about it being one size or the other when it was being made. Keeping the Excelsior bridge kinda made more sense, though. I was sorta thinking about the battle damage repairs when thinking about the bridge.
Hmm.. I was reading some stuff about Q-Ships recently. During the World Wars, some civilian vessels were converted into gunships with guns and torpedoes behind concealed ports and such. They were meant to surprise U-boats and shipping hunters that were apparently devoid of escort.
Anyway, perhaps the USS Centaur's appearance was due to something in this vein? It's unusal for a starship at wartime in a contested zone to be alone; and while the Centaur was at least an even match for one Jem'Hadar attack ship, Reynolds obviously thought the opposite for three of them, as they are typically deployed. Why would a single starship be operating in a warzone against odds such as the Dominion presented? Perhaps she was also on some special op, and the ship was outfitted accordingly?
Mark
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
I thought the Centaur was just on patrol and happened to find the single fighter. The captain probably assumed that if 3 fighters show up, there may be even more on the way.
Posted by Akira62497 (Member # 850) on :
never thought of it that way
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Remember, three of those attack ships nailed the Oddessy and I'm sure the Centaur does not have a galaxy's firepower. Looked a whole lot faster and more manuverable than the Defiant though....
In the (non canon I know) Dominion War books, the Centaur was sneaking behind enemy lines to drop off starfleet special ops guys on select worlds where they would act as listening posts. A one way trip for those officers, I'd imagine. The books also deal with the "Where the hell was the Enterprise?" question and gives a glimpse into Ro's time with the Maquis as they are getting rubbed out.....
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
A collection of random comments, not directly related to the pics:
- I doubt the basic design of this ship was in any way influenced by the war, since the low registry suggests something that was launched before even the Cardassian conflict (a ship with NCC in the 57000 range was operational when the Cardies got nasty, if we believe the Encyclopedia on the Rutledge).
- I also don't see this ship as very exceptional. All the traditional elements are there, save for a readily identifiable shuttlebay (unless the bow thing is one). A Nebula is a far weirder piece of work.
- A z-axis movement won't jeopardize a Nebula, unless it's a z-axis *acceleration*... Yeah, that design is *scary*.
- If three Jemmie bugs really presented a problem for a full-sized Starfleet ship several years after the Odyssey incident, Earth would no longer exist and the Bajorans would be learning to speak Jem'Hadar. Reynolds' retreat must be due either to his ship being weaker than usual (due to size or previous damage) or to tactical concerns we aren't aware of. Perhaps he did realize even more fighters would be on their way. Or perhaps he received a coded message from Starfleet to back the hell off and stop jeopardizing Sisko's mission?
- It seems pretty standard wartime practice to operate fast, aggressive but defensively impotent "hunter" ships against similar enemy vessels. The Centaur could have been Starfleet's analogy to the British torpedo boats that clashed against their German counterparts in the Channel, or against Italian forces in the Med. Such a mission profile would call for a no-frills ship that could justifiably lack a shuttlebay and be smaller than a Miranda.
- Also, such vessels would make for nice reconaissance assets. The greeblies on the Centaur could be sigint gear. Instead of loitering in a barely safe region, like the cold war spyships normally did, these ships would enter a decidedly unsafe region and grab whatever info they can. The Feds were at an intelligence disadvantage anyway, what with those badass Dominion sensors that could spot cloaked ships sectors away. Aggressive sigint would be a necessity, the ship's range compensating for the sensors' lack of range.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
quote:If three Jemmie bugs really presented a problem for a full-sized Starfleet ship several years after the Odyssey incident, Earth would no longer exist and the Bajorans would be learning to speak Jem'Hadar. Reynolds' retreat must be due either to his ship being weaker than usual (due to size or previous damage) or to tactical concerns we aren't aware of. Perhaps he did realize even more fighters would be on their way. Or perhaps he received a coded message from Starfleet to back the hell off and stop jeopardizing Sisko's mission?
Could it be that either Starfleet has developed some sort of new shield to defend against the poloron beam? Not only that, you are dealing with small ships agianst a big ship. The Enterprise herself could not defend agianst even three ships like a B'rel (which should be the same size but they are not). There are alot of incidents concerning the E-D having trouble with two or even one ship that should be far weaker than herself.
Posted by E. Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Though the general incompetence of a certain member of her command staff factored heavily in most of those incidents.
I didn't get the impression the Centaur was a full-sized juggernaut. She may have been a match for one J'H attack ship, but four? Not exactly favorable odds for an underpowered, 80-year old starship.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
More like 30-40 years IMO. Despite her size, I got the impression that the Centaur was not a battlewagon in terms of shields or armament. Timo's assertion that she was damaged in weapons or something would make a certain amount of sense... However, the general fact remains that with the exception of the Defiant (and Valiant), I don't think we've seen any real single-ship actions against Dominion forces. It's tough to judge. I believe that Reynolds took off because he though his ship was outnumbered and outgunned by 3-4 enemy Atack Ships.
However, if the Centaur had one thing going for her, it was her speeed - she was able to outrun Attack Ships despite her age and damage inflicted. THAT could be the reason she was out alone, as she'd be able to escape any particular attack assuming she wasn't ambushed.
Finally, assuming that Reynolds a) survived to be mentioned in "Sacrifice of Angels", and b) that the Centaur survived with him, that ship would probably have to be more than a dinky no-frills ship. Reynolds was in a position of some authority in the fleet, and odds are you don't command other ships from a grunt ships yourself. Of course, I'm discounting the notion that Sisko was commanding the whole fleet in "Sacrifice" from the Defiant.
Mark
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
And discounting the possibility of favoritism from Sisko's part. Perhaps he simply gave the juiciest jobs in the Fleet to his old buddies? Or was the most concerned about them, enough to mention them in dialogue while higher-ups in bigger ships went without mention.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Mabye the reason for Reynolds' retreat is less complicated: He was not supposed to breach enemy lines. Often commanders on smaller vessels are not privy to the "big picture" and have to obey orders that seem to make no sense. Dax and Bashir certainly complain to Sisko about the Federation's tactics (or lack thereof). Reynolds may have been in unauthorized prusuit of a small Dominion attack ship (Sisko's), and realized that his overzealousness was not only violating orders, but risking his ship and crew.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
