posted
Erm... No... From this view it appears that they used a severely shortened neck. Just like in the encyclopedia-II...
But I think you're right about the sec. hull. They must have used two of them in order to make it longer. Either that, or they simply cut one in half and added some sort of filler in the middle...
------------------ "I fart in your general direction!" -John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
posted
Y'know, now that I look at it again, I think that the back of the sec. hull doesn't have the undercut. I realize most of the back end is burnt off, but I think the intact part extends far enough back that we should be able to see the undercut, if it's there. So it either doesn't have one, or has a rather small one...
------------------ "I fart in your general direction!" -John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
posted
Okay the warp pods aren't the same size as the GCS pods. Here's a quick proof for that.
First off, lets assume the warp endcap area (everything forward of the gold rings including the bussard collector) is the same as that of a GCS because they almost certainly are in fact. Taking the AMT 18" Galaxy class model blueprints (because they were handy) I measured the total warp pod length = 5.5" and the pod endcap (bussard collector and everything forward of the gold rings) = .75". Therefore the endcap composes 13.5% of the total length. Next I roughly measured the New Orleans endcap in the above pic to be = .25" and the total warp pod length = 3", this means the NO endcap comprises only 8.3% of the total pod length......therefore, the NO warp pods are longer. Even if the endcaps are scaled down GCS versions, we can positively say that they just didn't scale down the entire GCS warp pod and stick it on. Regardless of its actual scale factor, it is a different version than that of the GCS warp pod.
posted
Alexander: Fantastic picture. It would be fine if you could scan the other models as well. Well, that was the understatement of the week. Honestly, I'm desperately waiting for them!
Model size: Most probably a modification of the 18" Galaxy model
Engineering hull: My impression is that they assembled two Galaxy engineering hulls that connect approximately in the middle of the text marker. The rear hull piece still has the phaser strip, so there are two of them. My estimation is that the hull is a bit longer than in my preliminary schematic, and it doesn't have the undercut. They must have used a lot of additional polystyrene and putty to do it.
Neck: The neck has to be much shorter than the Galaxy neck, since the forward end of the engineering hull is very close to the saucer. I still can't imagine it, since both available top views seem to show the complete neck (maybe without the impulse engine)
Nacelles: Shipbuilder could be right the nacelles are longer. This would explain the 4 deepenings visible in the top view. Since none of the nacelles is intact, I will try to superimpose them to prove it.
Impulse engines: There seem to be no engines attached to the saucer rear end. Maybe the pods actually hold them? However, it is also possible they rea integrated into the saucer hull.
posted
The neck appears to be from a large version of a GC and put on a GC saucer - a wedge of it used... not the entire GC neck
GC=Galaxy Class :]
Andrew
------------------ With the first link, a chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably." Capt. Jean-Luc Picard - The Drumhead
posted
The Saucer impulse engines are pretty visible on the destroyed pic from Pedro, at least the starboard side engine is. Not sure but it looks like the port engine may be missing on Alexander and Pedro's pics?? Battle damage or just a bad angle for the picture??
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm starting to lean towards those extra pods being torpedo launchers. Earlier pictures were rather vague on the subject. In this latest one, they don't look like sensor platforms, and an impulse engine wouldn't face forwards and backwards. (Well, it could, but Starfleet doesn't have a history of building ships like that.)
------------------ "The record of my unspeakable crimes, in previous lives, in previous times, indelibly stains the pages of history." -- They Might Be Giants
posted
To celebrate my 50th post, I thought I'd post a larger version of my New Orleans Top diagram from my Fleet Charts, for your amusement/disection. =]
The only flaw I see is that I made the pylons too wide and detailed... They seem to taper and have very little surface detail on the model.
------------------ Lyta Vorlon: "Our great mistake. Our failing. And now your failing. The error is compounded." Delenn: "What mistake?" Lyta Vorlon: "The first one, the one from which all mistakes proceed: The error of Pride..."
posted
that is a great picture/diagram, who did it? It looks like the line drawings from the original encyc. which i like better than the shaded colour drawings...
but! just a little thing - on the top of the saucer - and probably the bottom - and at least of the port side of the neck there are little 'half' windows - i.e. they look about half the size of the larger windows next to it...
love the pic
Andrew
PS is it possible to see such pics for the cheyenne, akira, norway etc...
posted
Please re-read my previous post in order to determine just WHO the mystery man was who made that.... Hint: the word "my" and "I" occurs frequently in my post. =P
Cheyenne: I'm planning on it. Akira: It's possible.
------------------ Lyta Vorlon: "Our great mistake. Our failing. And now your failing. The error is compounded." Delenn: "What mistake?" Lyta Vorlon: "The first one, the one from which all mistakes proceed: The error of Pride..."
Printer-friendly view of this topic
