-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?
posted
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.
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
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!
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
It's "Shelley". And I believe everyone has started calling the Shelley "Curry" class.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
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.
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
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
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
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 !
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
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.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
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
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
But I still like to call them Shelley, Medusa and Baracus.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
"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...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
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?
posted
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.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
