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 » "Centaur Type" => Wambandu Class (Page 2)

  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: "Centaur Type" => Wambandu Class
Sol System
two dollar pistol
Member # 30

 - posted      Profile for Sol System     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think the encylopedia falls into the "canon unless contradicted" catagory. For most of those class names, we know that that is what the people who make the show call the ships.

------------------
"I'll turn everything around and confuse you. I'll fix it so you can't remember what was true."
--
They Might Be Giants


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Aethelwer
Frank G
Member # 36

 - posted      Profile for Aethelwer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Exactly. We have no reason to believe those ships weren't Apollo-class. It's likely that the Romulans put in a new deflector system, leaving the old one for the Enterprise to eventually pick up.

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
Blitzwing: "If I want to know what's on your mind, I'll splatter it on the wall and see for myself!"


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Brown_supahero
Active Member
Member # 83

 - posted      Profile for Brown_supahero     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think the Appolo Class Starship looks like this

Aren't Vulcans part of the Federation thus making the Apollo Class and the T'Pau a Federation Ship

[This message was edited by Brown_supahero on March 24, 1999.]


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35

 - posted      Profile for The First One         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okuda said in an email to me (he said airily) that initially he'd always assigned conjectural registry numbers adn classes to ships mentioned. However, as the writers and FX people went off half-cocked again and again, he's ultimately had to abandon the practice to avoid mix-ups like the Excelsior Lexington and so on. . . notice that while the Enc. I mentions the T'Pau and the Apollo-class (the only example mentioned in the entry is the Ajax) and duplicates these entries in the Enc. II, the T'Pau is only listed in the list of ships and given the contentious class in the Enc. II - a clear example of such a desire for completeness.

------------------
Space Corps Directive #723: Terraformers are expressly forbidden from recreating Swindon.


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Federation Shipmaster
Kai Tak Pilot
Member # 15

 - posted      Profile for Federation Shipmaster     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's whta the Vulcan one looks like, but there is a non-canon version talked about on SFCR a while ago.
Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
The359
The bitch is back
Member # 37

 - posted      Profile for The359     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Two problems with the Vulcan looking ship:

1) There is no visibile deflector dish, so where did they get deflector componants from? If there is no deflector, it can't be T'Pau

2) Why would a Vulcan starship design and constructed ship be named after a Roman God? And why would all the other ships in the class also be Greek/Roman (with the exception of Gage)?

------------------
"The one, the only, THE 359!"


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Aethelwer
Frank G
Member # 36

 - posted      Profile for Aethelwer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The deflector could be internal or structured differently. I mean, look at the Miranda...

It's not necessarily a Vulcan design, and even if it were, it could have been named by humans anyway.

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
Motormaster: "Megatron's in trouble!"
Dead End: "Who cares?"
Wildrider: "It looks like Starscream's defeated him!"
Dead End: "So?"


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
TSN
I'm... from Earth.
Member # 31

 - posted      Profile for TSN     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Who said the Apollo was Vulcan? The T'Pau was, but not necessarily the Apollo.

And deflectors don't have to glow. Impulse engines don't always (e.g. Defiant).

------------------
"I fart in your general direction!"
-John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Bernd
Guy from Old Europe
Member # 6

 - posted      Profile for Bernd     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My theory about the Apollo:

Unless someone proves me I'm wrong (maybe with an Apollo class USS Gage kitbash from "Emissary"), I believe what is written in the Encyclopedia II. The Vulcan ship is actually of the Apollo class.

I think the ship is an originally Vulcan design, that was later adopted for Starfleet. The first Starfleet vessel of this class being the USS Apollo, it was called Apollo class. There could be a civilian name for this class as well, in this case the Encyclopedia II would be inaccurate but not wrong to call the T'Pau an Apollo class ship.

There could be a little deflector beneath the hull.


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Sirmaniac
Ex-Member


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It doesn't seem all that unlikely for the DS9TM ships to be scrapped together assemblies from previously junked ships.

As far as I can see, most of the parts in their new configuration connect at the the same points they connected to in their old configuration, so we know these parts are structurally able to hold at those points; it's not like Starfleet had to retrofit new connect points into the parts.

It doesn't seem like too difficult a chore for a construction yard to make small hull sections to act as bridges between melded assemblies. Structural integrity fields are insurance policies that help keep the parts together.

I imagine the most difficult part would be in mounting the warp nacelles for correct warp field geometry, and I'm sure computer models helped there. It's not like these ships have to be overly efficient at warp anyway, just able to fire at hostiles without ripping themselves to shreds.

This process seems faster than trying to build brand new ships, though admittedly, it would be a pain in the rear, and I'm sure most of the crews of these ships are spending a lot of their time praying to whatever gods they believe in (though a lot of them may also be cursing the ugly stick that overrode the shields).

Regarding scale problems being the proof that the ships cannot be made from previous assemblies, there is a flaw in that thinking: whether these ships are melds or not, they still have out-of-scale parts. If these ships are not melds but are original assemblies, and if I were to take them apart and make melds, we're going to have out-of-scale melds, just like these. Basically, if out-of-scale parts exist at all, they can be used in original assemblies, or they can be used in melds of two or more ships.


IP: Logged
Warped1701
Back from Vacation
Member # 40

 - posted      Profile for Warped1701     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The problem is, out of scale parts do not fit. You can't put a 1/16 inch screw in a 1/32 hole. It just doesn't work that way. And I believe it probably works the same way in the 24th century. If it's out of scale you can't put it together, because it just won't fit.

------------------
Risk is our business! That's what this starship is all about....that's why we're aboard her!"


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
TSN
I'm... from Earth.
Member # 31

 - posted      Profile for TSN     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The parts can be out-of-scale, if the outside is where the similarity ends. Internally, they could be much different, as long as they are original constructs.

Think about this: If the Curry was made out of pieces of a damaged Ex. or two, and a damaged Mir., where's the warp core? In an Ex., it apparently extends from the back of the saucer down through the neck, to a spot above the deflector. W/ the saucer moved back, they would have to find a new space inside the ship to put the core, then they would have to reroute all the EPS conduits to feed out of it, and put in new warp plasma conduits to go to the nacelles in their new positions... This would be much more trouble that it's worth. However, if it was a new design, the core and conduits and such would be put in the right places upon construction, and things wouldn't have to get all shifted around.

------------------
"I fart in your general direction!"
-John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Sirmaniac
Ex-Member


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Warped 1701: I'm not saying the parts can always go together without being modified. That's just a fitting problem, the same type of fitting problem we'd have if a the pieces were to scale and we tried melding them. To be accurate, we can take two Excelsiors, try to swap the nacelles, and we'd still have fitting problems. Scale doesn't matter here, the fact that the part wasn't made to go there matter.

TSN: You said "making the Miranda pieces much larger (in comparison to the Ex. parts) than they would be if the ships had been Frankensteined from damaged ships." Should I take this to mean "Making the Miranda pieces much larger (. . .) than they would be if the ships had been Frankensteined from [Exclesiors and Mirandas]? If this is what you meant, than we're not necessarily dealing with Excelsiors and Mirandas (Since Excelsiors and Mirandas have different scales to the parts we're working with, the parts must have come from other classes of ships, right?), so we can only assume these ships would not have all of the parts where we would expect to find them.

To sumarize (though looking this post over, it seems the summary is larger than my original point): the parts in question are not to scale, therefore they cannot have totally come from our familiar ships (I.e. saucer from Excelsior, nacelles from Miranda, rollbar from Miranda, Constellation saucer bumps). The biggest proof of this is the ship in the DS9TM that appears to have a runabout "wing." No one is going to convince me that was salvaged from a runabout. It is probably one of the custom assemblies. It is possible that the Curry does use parts taken directly from a Miranda, but then it cannot have an Excelsior saucer/body. The body must have come from some other class (and any variation of familiar/new parts).
If there is absolutely no way an Excelsior nacelle pylon can attach to your ship's hardpoint for nacelle pylon connection, a custom pylon can be quickly made that marries the two foreign assemblies; you're splicing a part into the new shape the same way you use male/female connection in electronics (Don't modify the original part, just put a bridge bewteen them).

TSN: You made an excellent point with the warp core example, but when we decided the pieces were out of scale to one or more of the ships we thought they took the parts from, we in essence proved the parts cannot all come from the ships we thought they came from, so we cannot use these ships (and the arrangement of important systems) as examples with much accuracy. So, instead of an Excelsior with the warp core in the saucer/neck/body, it came from (I don't know) the Patriot-class starship, an Excelsior variant with the warp core in the primary hull only. Having lost its original nacelles, Miranda nacelles were reclaimed and attached at the saucer where the Patriot always mounted its nacelles. To its final stage, this example could be that the Miranda-style nacelles could have come from (again, I don't know, the Nyota-class) and its nacelles might be larger or smaller than the Miranda's.


IP: Logged
Sirmaniac
Ex-Member


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lindsly: I believe Sisko said something to the effect of "Have Destroyer Wings (numbers identifying wing assignments) (do somthing), and tell Captain's Diego and Reynolds to (something).

Sorry for the brain farts on exact diologue, I might be able to check it in the morning after I get off work, but this post is in case I forget.

Starfleet has destroyers just as it has frigates I suppose. It's not definite, but I've always allowed that Sisko could be ordering the Destroyer Wings and telling two specific captains (Diego and Reynolds) of that wing orders for their part in the wing's attack. Knowing that Reynolds could be Captain Charlie Reynolds of the Centaur, it's possible that the Centaur is classified in television context as a destroyer, though that would mess up the light cruiser (or whatever) classification in the DS9TM. Or it could be another Captain Reynolds.


IP: Logged
TSN
I'm... from Earth.
Member # 31

 - posted      Profile for TSN     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, if there were two Captains Reynolds, I would think he would have specified to avoid confusion.

As for the theory of the ship parts: Granyed, they didn't necessarily come from the Ex. and Mir. They could be from ships that use the same parts at different sizes. But, if we are assuming that SF makes ships w/ the smae parts at different sizes, why make it more complicated than it already is? Just assume that the Centaur and Curry are those ships, not that they were assembled from others. Occam's Razor.

------------------
"I fart in your general direction!"
-John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

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