Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Rehashing Galaxy Wings
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mr. Pink: [QB] I watched this episode not too long ago and heard this infamous quote for myself. Now I should preface my tiny and inconsequential discovery (assuming it hasn't already been talked about) with my belief that there are no where near 93 Galaxy class ships, let alone 93 wings of them. (Going by modern Air Force terminology, a Wing is composed of Squadrons, which is in turn composed of Flights, which themselves contain the individual units, ie ships, people, or planes) So imagine my delight when I heard this quote and instead of it being what everybody said it was, it turned out to make my desire to explain a small Starfleet that much easier. It is not, "Galaxy Wings NINETY-ONE through NINETY-THREE" It [b]is[/b], "Galaxy Wings NINE-ONE through NINE-THREE" In sort, without the padding of unneccessary bullshit to conceal the lack of new stuff to talk about, this is another example of the starbase or Jupiter station speculation. Are starbases numbered chronologically? There is no evidence towards that, where there are several real life examples of things and particularly installations not being numbered sequentially. And this wording makes it that much easier to chalk this up to the idea that this is another example of things being numbered in a way that we simply do not have enough information to make sense of. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3