Flare Sci-fi Forums
Flare Sci-Fi Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » STXI Farragut pic is a faaaaaaaake!!!!!! (Page 5)

  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   
Author Topic: STXI Farragut pic is a faaaaaaaake!!!!!!
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742

 - posted      Profile for Amasov Prime     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, it's an art book and most of the stuff is self-explanatory. I'm just glad that we got *something*. My last art book was... can remember. The sketchbooks or ST Design? It's been too long. And the quality is really good (of the pictures, I mean)
Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I believe the last art book was Ships Of The Line, which contained pretty much eveything we'd already seen millions of times before, i.e. Excelsiors, Mirandas, and Birds of Prey.

--------------------
"A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
vwuser
Member
Member # 2182

 - posted      Profile for vwuser     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I feel like the only one in the room who is not getting why the latest girl in the room is hot. I mean she dresses fine and speaks, well, good, but there's no substance there. I suppose she's good for a one-night stand, but if you wanted something more, she couldn't deliver.
Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The metaphors, man, the METAPHORS!!!

--------------------
"A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742

 - posted      Profile for Amasov Prime     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Any guess why the Excelsior is copper-colored? Is that the Vulcan commemorative paintjob or something?

--------------------
"This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."

Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lee
I'm a spy now. Spies are cool.
Member # 393

 - posted      Profile for Lee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, lert me see if I have this right:

The Newton-type is a dual-nacelle, dual-secondary-hull ship.

The Mayflower-type is a dual-nacelle ship - hell, might as well come out and say it, it's as close as dammit to a canon TOSed Miranda as we'll ever see.

The Armstrong-type is a three-nacelled ship - they all look like nacelles to me, it's not a dual-nacelled/one-secondary config nor is it it a single-nacelle/dual-secondary config (as groovy as that might be)?

--------------------
Never mind the Phlox - Here's the Phase Pistols

Registered: Jul 2000  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lee: That's 100% correct.
Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Mars Needs Women
Sexy Funmobile
Member # 1505

 - posted      Profile for Mars Needs Women     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Amasov Prime:
Any guess why the Excelsior is copper-colored? Is that the Vulcan commemorative paintjob or something?

Can show a picture of it?
Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
vwuser
Member
Member # 2182

 - posted      Profile for vwuser     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Check page 3.

As I mentioned earlier, I know that one of the ships was labeled with the registry of the Armstrong or the Excelsior. The registry, well, most of it, can be seen in the ship forward of the Enterprise.

As for the other ships, I don't see any evidence that they were labeled on the primary hull. On the nacelles, that's a different story.

Do you think we will see these ship classes in the next movie?

Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged
Mars Needs Women
Sexy Funmobile
Member # 1505

 - posted      Profile for Mars Needs Women     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I guess the copper color is to indicate the ship's equipped with transwarp drive [Wink]

I hope we do get to see these ships again, though considering the events of the first movie, I wouldn't be surprised if Starfleet replenished it ranks with ship designs based on the Enterprise, equipped with similar weapons and technology.

[ November 21, 2009, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Mars Needs Women ]

Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
MinutiaeMan
Living the Geeky Dream
Member # 444

 - posted      Profile for MinutiaeMan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Except for the rest of the fleet that was apparently sitting on their hands out in the Laurentian system.

I suspect that the copper ship is a placeholder for another design not yet completed.

--------------------
“Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov
Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha

Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged
The Mighty Monkey of Mim
SUPPOSED TO HAVE ICE POWERS!!
Member # 646

 - posted      Profile for The Mighty Monkey of Mim     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bernd's site now claims that a special feature on the blu-ray depicts the Mayflower as being of the three-nacelled type rather than the two-nacelled design it's depicted as on the ship charts. Can anyone verify this, preferably by providing a screenshot? Also, is there any more ship info on the blu-ray?

Also, as someone else already pointed out, this business about the registry number being "corrected" to 1620 on the final model is incorrect, as you can just barely see the edge of the final 1 in some of the screencaps of the Enterprise in front of the saucer. It's definitely 1621 in the film.

Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dukhat
Hater of Stock Footage
Member # 341

 - posted      Profile for Dukhat     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Bernd's site now claims that a special feature on the blu-ray depicts the Mayflower as being of the three-nacelled type rather than the two-nacelled design it's depicted as on the ship charts. Can anyone verify this, preferably by providing a screenshot? Also, is there any more ship info on the blu-ray?
I think he just made a mistake. Bernd says that both the Mayflower and the Defiant are of the three-nacelled class, but on the Blu-Ray, they're both of the two-nacelled, full-saucer class.

Man, I really wish someone would come out with class names for these ships. It's getting tiring trying to describe them all the time.

Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
The Mighty Monkey of Mim
SUPPOSED TO HAVE ICE POWERS!!
Member # 646

 - posted      Profile for The Mighty Monkey of Mim     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I figured that too at first, but I was confused because he specifically wrote:

"On an early comparison chart the unnamed class III is represented by the 'USS Mayflower NCC-1621', here still with a rollbar that is not on the movie model. The year of the Mayflower's journey was 1620, and since it is unquestionably a tip of the hat the registry may have been fixed on the final model. According to the special features of the Blu-ray, on the other hand, the 'USS Mayflower NCC-1621' belongs to unnamed class I. We can't tell at this point which statement is true."


Just looking for clarification.

Regarding descriptive names, in the absence of further information, I'd suggest calling them the Newton-type (two nacelles dorsal, double underslung hulls); Armstrong-type (three nacelles ventral); and Mayflower-type (two nacelles ventral).

Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Teh PW
Self Impossed Exile (This Space for rent)
Member # 1203

 - posted      Profile for Teh PW         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://news.sketchucation.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/star_trek_uc.jpg

dunno what this is, but me likes the idea...

http://api.ning.com/files/FaUCFb5o3GHS8czQ5tjGwFUBmB15GqNGqEPgf5b61ltC2dyejswcDebVkKf-zRDZ6HvJ46Zv2Zm6OZqocDk5C5m99Ceu8bB0/STXIAntares.jpg
then me finds that, but me not so sure...

--------------------
*shrug* Ready, shoot, aim.

Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


© 1999-2008 Solareclipse Network.

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3