------------------ "What a wonderful and amazing scheme have we here of the magnificent vastness of the Universe! So many Suns, so many Earths...!" - Christian Huygens, New Conjectures Concerning the Planetary Worlds, Their Inhabitants and Productions (ca 1670)
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Yes, this is my mouse pad image. I'm still not convinced.
------------------ "You are stupid and evil and do not know you are stupid and evil." -- Gene Ray, Cubic
Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
if the "ship" is a ship, why is not white like the two known ships?
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
1. its in shadows - not lit up like the other 'two' 2. Merchantman wasn't "white" 3. The refit E isn't really 'White' - the Original E - was painted white - but the Erefit - you can see the bear hull plating. 4. Starfleet ships range from grey - baby blue - to off white 5. It doesn't have to be a Starfleet ship 6. It could be a generic fed ship 7. It might not be from the Federation 8. It could be dirty from what ever cargo it has been 'hauling'? 9 I reckon the small nacelles and the saucer on top of the 'trapezoid' section are whitish - the actual cargo?? compartment is a grey colour.
------------------ "What a wonderful and amazing scheme have we here of the magnificent vastness of the Universe! So many Suns, so many Earths...!" - Christian Huygens, New Conjectures Concerning the Planetary Worlds, Their Inhabitants and Productions (ca 1670)
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 138) on :
Lets assume that is a ship. Even if it were built by an alien species that are members of the Federation, then their ship would be considered a Federation starship.
------------------ "The Borg wouldn't know fun if they assimilated an amusment park" - Torres Federation Starship Datalink - On that annoying Tripod server.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I see what you're talking about, but I still don't think it's a ship, and the most reasonable explanation for its being EXACTLY the same shade of blue as the wall is : It's part of the wall.
------------------ "Nobody knows this, but I'm scared all the time... of what I might do, if I ever let go." -- Michael Garibaldi
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
I could be wrong, but it looks like that is some sort of ship, and it's casting a shadow on the wall. If it were attached to the wall, the shadow would be up more.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "This song is dedicated to everyone in the audience tonight...WITH ONE EYE!" - John Linnell
Posted by Justin_Timberland (Member # 236) on :
Where's the ship again?
------------------ We did it on the floor, We did it by the door, We did it all night, We did it under a light, So how about for tonight we do it some more...
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Look at the front of the E's secondary hull. Go straight down. There's a thing that looks like a diving board sticking out under a hole in the wall. Under that, there's a thing that looks like a black shoebox. We're talking about the shoebox.
And the color doesn't mean anything. The Excelsior looks blue, too. The "shoebox" looks the same color as the wall because it's in the same shadow as the wall.
I'm not sure if they're nacelles or not, but there's definitely something attached to the upper edge of the ship, at the end closer to us. You can even see the shadow of the one closer to the wall.
------------------ Jay Leno: "In the story of 'Jack and the Beanstalk', what did the goose lay?" "Bosco": "Everybody." -The Tonight Show, "Jaywalking"
Posted by Justin_Timberland (Member # 236) on :
Is it a Sydney?
------------------ We did it on the floor, We did it by the door, We did it all night, We did it under a light, So how about for tonight we do it some more...
Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
I just don't see the ship. If someone could draw a 3-d diagram, this may help me to see the ship. Thank you.
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Sometimes, I wonder about the resolution of people's monitors... and whether they are seeing what I am seeing, I've got a nice crisp image - but when I use the computers at University, they have horrible resolution and/or ??graphics cards?? and all of the crisp pictures look grainy and spotty.
Andrew
------------------ "What a wonderful and amazing scheme have we here of the magnificent vastness of the Universe! So many Suns, so many Earths...!" - Christian Huygens, New Conjectures Concerning the Planetary Worlds, Their Inhabitants and Productions (ca 1670)
------------------ Ross: "Inter arma, enim silent leges." Bashir: "'In the time of war the law falls silent.' Cicero. Have we become a 24th-century Rome, driven by the fact that Caesar can do no wrong?!" -Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
[This message has been edited by Fabrux (edited February 20, 2000).]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Actually, that's green on my monitor... :-)
------------------ Jay Leno: "In the story of 'Jack and the Beanstalk', what did the goose lay?" "Bosco": "Everybody." -The Tonight Show, "Jaywalking"
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
*smacks TSN's monitor*
------------------ Ross: "Inter arma, enim silent leges." Bashir: "'In the time of war the law falls silent.' Cicero. Have we become a 24th-century Rome, driven by the fact that Caesar can do no wrong?!" -Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
Green on mine too :P
------------------ "The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey
Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :
Green here as well.
targetemployee: You can't see the ship? I would've thought your eagle eyes would've spotted it first, along with a registry and name.
------------------ "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." -Mark Twain
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
*smacks Fabrux's monitor*
Dammit, it's not yellow. It's green.
And it ain't a Sydney. Doesn't look like one. Just a funny looking box of sorts.
------------------ 7 alarm clock: "Do not touch me." Dilbert: "Then how do I turn you off?" 7: "Believe me, I am plenty turned off."
Posted by colin (Member # 217) on :
I see it, but I can't conceptialize the ship.
------------------
takeoffs are optional; landings are mandatory
Posted by Fabrux (Member # 71) on :
*rubs eyes* Aha! It is a little green... Damn colorblindness...
------------------ Ross: "Inter arma, enim silent leges." Bashir: "'In the time of war the law falls silent.' Cicero. Have we become a 24th-century Rome, driven by the fact that Caesar can do no wrong?!" -Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges
Posted by bonecrusher on :
How in the hell is that a ship????
------------------ "I Got two words for you.. S*uck it!"-DeGeneration X Oh Hell Ya there back!
This is what we here at the crazy people's institute think is the ship:
------------------ Frank's Home Page "This song is dedicated to everyone in the audience tonight...WITH ONE EYE!" - John Linnell
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
trapezoidal body - presumably for cargo... two nacelles mounted on the forward dorsal section port and starboard.
A forward saucer section mounted directly on top of the trapezoidal section.
CARGO SHIP!
------------------ "What a wonderful and amazing scheme have we here of the magnificent vastness of the Universe! So many Suns, so many Earths...!" - Christian Huygens, New Conjectures Concerning the Planetary Worlds, Their Inhabitants and Productions (ca 1670)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
The design is somewhat similar to those grain haulers we saw in TAS "More Tribbles". Flat body with cargo holds hanging underneath.
Perhaps the intention of the artists originally was to make the Spacedock a center of hectic activity, with lots of ship types buzzing around. Two were inserted as matte paintings (the Excelsior and this one), and the rest were expected to move around, so they would be done as models. Then it was decided not to clutter up the image after all, so all that was inserted for the final shot was the Enterprise, plus those tiny harbor shuttles. (Refresh my memory - is this a real shot from STIII, or just artwork done on STIII elements?)
If this isn't the case, it would seem odd for the artists to insert a tiny ship that can only barely be identified as one...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
To me the question is not "Is this a ship?", but "If it's not a ship, what is it?". It doesn't look at all like a part of the huge, bright and clean internal structure of the spacedock. No matter if it is the spacedock's trash can, a cargo container, a cargo container with nacelles or a real starship, it doesn't belong there, it's some sort of spacecraft.
Y'know, I'm fairly certain that that "saucer section" is not. It's probably just that shape. For all we know, it might be the big door that opens up to put cargo in...
------------------ Jay Leno: "In the story of 'Jack and the Beanstalk', what did the goose lay?" "Bosco": "Everybody." -The Tonight Show, "Jaywalking"
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
I'm sorry to dig up an extremely old thread, but here I go. I consider myself to be a bit handy with CG, so I made some reference images to show you my take of this object.
let me know what you think. i have not drawn any conclusions on whether this is a ship or not... but it is definitely not attached to the starbase.
Posted by This space for rent, 800-634-7213 (Member # 417) on :
It's a casino ship....
Why?
I don't know...
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
How can some of you say it is NOT a ship? Of course it is! It's as plain as day! Not all designs have to look the same! Look at the Antares! That has no saucer or real nacelles, but presumably some are in Starfleet.
Posted by pIn'a' Sov (Member # 293) on :
I have a feeling we�ve had this discussion several times before, but I�m not sure if I posted my own screencap then, so here it is: http://w1.314.telia.com/~u31412331/old/starbaseshipbig.jpg Posted by Pro. Portside (Member # 390) on :
well after pulling out my copy of The Art Of Star Trek(pages 212/213) to get a good look at the "ship" I have come to think that this object is floting near the wall and not part of it. But I can not see anything that looks like what I would expect a warp nacel of that time to look like (mainly in name of the size of the nacel). So may be wat we are looking at is a cargo container that was moved from star A to star B by a tug of some kind then droped here? Some what like the tug designs in done by Jackills or FRank Joseph?
and by the way that circle was green on my screen too.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I think it is a background ship model. My reasoning is very simple: There's also another background ship model in the shot (although you can't see it in that pic), the Phase II Enterprise study model. If the VFX crew bothered to stick the PII model in there, then why not this cargo ship?
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
"This image is no modified"
LOL!
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
As I have said before, (and I hope I don't inspire too much hatred here) THOSE OF YOU WHO PERSIST IN SAYING YOU CANNOT SEE THE SHIP ARE VERY SAD INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE ALSO AS BLIND AS TIBERIAN BATS!
It's so obvious it's painful.
True, in the actual video, it is not as clear, because the lighting is darker. This is a publicity still, so you can see it a lot better. But the ship is there in the actual film.
Also, those of you who don't see the nacelles (2, similar to Constitution-refit type) are not looking hard enough. Here they are, highlighted:
The overall shape of the ship is a trapezoidal prism. I think someone should be able to draw or render it from this pic.
[ July 23, 2001: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Well this one definatly is.
on second thought, disregard those shapes on the aft end, I've gotten it wrong.
[ July 23, 2001: Message edited by: Reverend ]
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Take Two... Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Defiantly? Oh well, we all make mistakes.
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
Listen here, Orlinger. Just because you believe something is true, doesn't mean it's a universal fact. You may think that this is a ship. Others may not. It is your opinion that it is a ship. Therefore, it is not an indisputable fact.
[ July 23, 2001: Message edited by: Mr. Christopher ]
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
I belive Reverend and I have made this an indisputable fact. It is indeed a ship.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I still think that it could either way. It could be a ship; it could be a part of the Spacedock structure. The picture is fuzzy and the object in question has just enough features on it to be a ship, but at the same time the features that give it the appearance of a ship are small and out-of-focus enough for them to be just about anything. For instance, what we see as nacelles could be communications antennae and the bridge dome could really be a traffic control sensor dome.
My personal opinion is to lean towards it being a ship. However, I don't think it's a cargo ship or other interstellar ship. Those nacelles are too small to be able to propel that ship at anything faster than maybe warp one or two. To be honest, I think those are just impulse pods. So what do I think it is? I think it's a waste barge. I think it's part of a fleet of waste barges that picks up trash and other waste products from the Sol System bases, orbital complexes, drydocks, and construction yards and transports them to a general recycling center on (maybe) one of Mars' moons or something.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Until I read something from an ILM FVX technician who created the shot, it is not an indisputable fact -- as evidenced by the indisputable fact that we're still disputing it.
--Jonah
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
I see it has a low dome at the closest end - and indeed is casting a shadow on the wall.
It could be a ship. The reason for it sharing the same color as the spacedock walls could be that the walls and freighter (if it is such) were originally white - and later filtered blue prior to Exdelsior and Enterprise being added.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I apologize if I have offended you, or anyone, Mr. Christopher/Fabrux. I will be more courteous in the future.
However, those who still say it is NOT a ship are by this point (with all the highlights/enlargements/rendrings that have been done) stretching belief a little bit more than those who can see that it is. IMHO, of course.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Actually, no. The only thing that suggests it's a ship is the fact that it has things that resemble warp nacelles.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Why do you say that? It is a fairly large object not apparently connected to the dock structure. What else would it be?
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
TOP SECRET PROJECT REVEALED!
Starfleet conducts research on the effects of solid waste in space.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Well, it is connected to the support pylon. It doesn't look like it's moving and it is rather close to the pylon. It's either a docked ship or a structural projection.
If it is a part of the Spacedock, then it could serve several functions. It could be a traffic countrol system like I mentioned earlier. I mean, there are lots of shuttles, workbees, and technicians floating around in the docking bay and dodging the starships and each other.
It could also be a shuttle/workbee docking station for refueling and resupply. Those trapezoidal blocks underneath could be the fuel/water/whatever storage holds and the nacelle-like projections are the mooring clamps.
Or, it really could be a ship, in which case I stand behind my interplanetary waste barge theory.
Posted by mrneutron (Member # 524) on :
Regardng this "ship", I decided to do something a little radical...instead of relying on a single publicity photo, I looked at the movies.
Specifically, I looked at the spacedock scenes in ST3 and ST4 (widescreen) to see what I could see.
As it happens, in ST3 there are no shots that frame the spacedock hub where the you could see the object in question.
In ST4 you can see that part of the hub in the shot where the power goes out (you see the Excelsior off to screen left and a Miranda ass-end towards the camera). In this shot, the object in question is not present. Then again, the platorm seen above it in the photos posted here is also absent.
Its absense doesn't mean it's a ship. It's well established that ILM tore the spacedock model apart after ST3 and had to reassemble it for ST4, so no doubt some details would change.
Furthermore, if it was intended to be a ship, I think the photographers who made the publicity photo in question would have made the thing stand out from the wall instead of matching its color. If it is a "ship" I suspect it's something they had laying around the studio and stuck onto the spacedock model.
Regardless, the thing only appears in that publicity photo, so I would consider its existence apocryphal.
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
riiightt... Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Speaking of Spacedock, does anyone have pics of the Copernicus and the Miranda from ST4? (The Copernicus was that Oberth) I was never able to spot it.
Posted by PopMaze (Member # 302) on :
Veers, if you have the DVD of widescreen VHS copy of ST4, the Oberth is at the end of the movie. In the scene where Kirk and company go off to their new ship, the first interior shot shows the Oberth at the far left with only a small bit shown. It is however enough to be identified as an Oberth. Note that this will not be in the regular cropped versions on VHS as it's way to the left of the screen almost not in view.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
So that's why. I only have the laserdisc version of ST4, I'm afraid, but maybe it is big enough to see it.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Er...is it widescreen?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:As it happens, in ST3 there are no shots that frame the spacedock hub where the you could see the object in question.
That is incorrect. After seeing the photo, I checked my video (not widescreen) to see if it was really there, and it is indeed there. The lighting is not as illuminating in the movie, but I assure you it is there.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Well, it's a laserdisc, so it's widescreen, I should think.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, yes, but...then why did you say...buh?
Posted by mrneutron (Member # 524) on :
Mighty..
In which shot in ST3 can you see the "ship" in the spacedock?
Posted by PopMaze (Member # 302) on :
Here is a DVD capture from ST3 that someone made concerning the Spacedock interior. I just increased the gamma correction and circled both the freighter and the Phase 2 Enterprise.
Well the text I added didn't come out so good, but you can still fairly see what they are.
[ July 25, 2001: Message edited by: PopMaze ]
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Ohhhh, can we have some nice screen caps like that of the dock in ST:IV and how about some wide screen caps of SF headquarters in TMP, someone said that there are TOS shuttles to be seen docked in that 'hanger area'.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
It is a freighter! Ha ha! Speculation for weeks has proved us right! My, my, that is a gem shot. We need a spacedock scene like that in Trek X. Excelsiors...Oberths...Mirandas...Akiras... The Works!
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
No, it's some big, blackish, & oblong. That's about it. That makes it a freighter about as much as it makes it Long Dong Silver's cock.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
IT IS A SHIP!!!
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
In PopMaze's screen capture, that thing looks less like a ship and more like part of the physical structure of the hub. The details that we had picked out as nacelles and a bridge dome are all but gone.
In the end, unless someone actually comes out and tells us that, yes, that is a frieghter/transport/tanker/trash barg then we will not know for certain.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Look you guys. In the cap it's not even the same color as the spacedock. How can you say it looks even MORE like a structure in that pic?
This is complete and utter !@#$%^&*!!!! It's a freakin' ship. Get over it.
Next thing you'll be telling us the Phase II prototype is a fancy looking docking pylon, right?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Next thing you'll be telling us the Phase II prototype is a fancy looking docking pylon, right?
Yes, because that's exactly what the prototype is.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
No. It's now obviously not a part of the station structure, but that does NOT mean that it's a ship. It could be a floating "maintenance shed" or construction headquarters. It's could be a forward controller for Approach Control, not unlike the dome built into the deck of carriers for catting planes off. It could be a series of cargo containers in a holding pattern. It could be a fucking DUMPSTER.
And why do I seem to remember someone providing proof that the P-II ship was a later digital addition by an unknown party?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
The phase II was NOT a later addition. A lot of skeptics thought that it was for a long time after someone pointed it out, but it is in the actual film.
According to The Art of Star Trek, it was later used at Wolf 359 and Qualor II as well.
That 'maintenance shed' of yours has two Connie-refit style nacelles mounted on the forward hull, and a bridge module on the front. It's a ship.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
After looking at the pic in "The Art of Star Trek" I don't think, that this "thing" has nacelles.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Ummm...
...did you not even look at all the pics that have been posted which point them out in bright red highlights?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Those pics don't convince me. The pic in "TAoST" does.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Those are scans of the pic in TAoST. Why don't you get out a magnifying glass and look REEEEEAAALLL hard? There are two nacelles.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
I used one, but I can't see nacelles there.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
I say, Mim, how about you and I get some AT-ATs and pummel these insobourdanant members back to the TNO Forums? Anyone with half a mind can see that that floating dirt barge is in fact a ship.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Aha! We've solved the problem, then. The reason you see a ship and we don't is that you only have half a mind.
BTW, the McQuarrie ship seen here is the longer one (of the two we've seen). It was the shorter one that was seen in TBoBW and "Unification".
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
Excuse me? We should be the ones sent back to TNO? Who's been around here longer? Look, you're going to have to live with the fact that some people here don't share the same viewpoint as you do, as much as that bothers your tiny mind.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Excuse me, but I was the person who posted the pictures that show that thing with the nacelles highlighted in red. At first, I thought it may have been a freighter or some sort, but I have since had to rescend that conclusion. All we have here is trapezoidal prism with two rectangluar prongs and a dome. And those can only be somewhat clearly seen in the Art of Star Trek picture. I think that it is a docked module for spacedock traffic control (as I have guessed earlier) or a sublight trash hauler (as I have guessed earlier).
For my next point, I suggest that you calm down. No one here can definitely say whether that thing is a ship or not. No one here worked with ILM and helped produce that scene. Therefore, all of your "IT IS A SHIP YOU FOOLS!" is merely opinion, not fact. If someone who did that scene comes here and posts that, yes, it was a ship then by all means you can gloat. Until then, you have no more claim to being right that I have to proclaiming myself president of the USA. So drop the condescending attitudes and the insults.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Now now ladies, lets not resort to petty arguments just because people disagree with you. If is helps at all, here is a quick, basic rendering based on this dark blocky object, I think that it is a vessel of some description, obviously it has an industrial look to it so it could be anything from a neutronic fuel carrier to a tiberian garbage scow.
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
I completely agree with The Mighty Monkey of Mim, its quite obviously a ship, it was added to the shot of the Starbase interior, as was the shuttles, Ent and Excelsior. I am looking at visual effects and cg all the time, its fairly easy to tell.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
You see a ship because you WANT to see a ship. You want your name blazed across the electonic frontier as a pioneer. But wanting does not always make it so. This I know well.
I do not deny that it COULD be a ship. But there's no definitive proof. For all we know, it could've been Ease Owyeung's lunchbox. You cannot discount a possibility simply because you don't wish to believe it. Herein lies the differences of your camp (Fanboy Trouser-Jizzing)& our camp. (Rational Logical Thought)
I'm sure many of us would like to believe that the image portrayed is indeed some sort of civilian or support vessel. I know I'd love for it to be that. But I won't instantly deify it as such based on some undefinable imagery. The gamma-corrected shot proved only one thing: that the item in question was not not a part of the Spacedock hub. (I'll put aside the thoughts of possible aftermarket alteration for now) This new image still leaves the item in question as somes big, blackish, & oblong. There's really no definition to it. It's like looking at clouds--where you see a H&K MP5, I see a bunny rabbit.
In conclusion, we are not saying, "It's not a ship," we are saying, "It COULD be a ship, but there's not enough definition to be sure."
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Okay:
1. To Marshal Veers, while I share your frustration, I think we may be undermining our own purpose with a sore lack of diplomacy. There's no need to shout and I once again apologize if I myself am seeming arrogant.
2. Siggie, I realize you are the one who posted the pic. I am just interpreting it.
3. Spike. Use a better magnifying glass.
4. Reverend. Thank God someone finally did a rendering. It looks pretty good. I'll be interested to see if you do top and front views, too. One point though: It seems to me that the nacelles are mounted forward rather than aft, (that 'windshield' in the front is the bridge module, I think) so in the drawing they should be pointed the other way, and the cargo modules should be labeled innreverse order.
5. A suggestion to all: If you don't think it's a ship, why not just say so, leave it at that, and let the rest of us get on with things? (Not that I'm trying to be pompous, or anything. )
Posted by Mr. Christopher (Member # 71) on :
You? Pompous? Never.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Reverend: Very nice drawing! I too am under the school of thought that it is a ship, if only because there are other random ships in the dock as well. I'd say the only thing you may have left out in the sketch that I made out in the photo is the "dome" above the nacelles.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
quote:A suggestion to all: If you don't think it's a ship, why not just say so, leave it at that, and let the rest of us get on with things?
You do realize that this is nonsense, correct? This is akin to saying that at an environmental policies conference, the Republicans can come in and say "environmental protection is unnecessary," but then they have to leave without saying anything else. I also don't see why you should be telling the people with an opposing view to shut up and get out when the anti-Enterprise faction is still hammering away at the ship design.
In short, the people who think this is a ship can go on thinking that it's a ship, but the people who think otherwise are going to be allowed to express their opinions to the contrary. And the best way to deal with those people is to explain your opinions, not tell them "I'm right; you're wrong," "Why don't all of you go back to the TNO Forums," and "Anyone with half a brain can see it's a ship."
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
Not that I don't enjoy the invective, but here's a thought:
Most of the designers on Trek are fairly good sports regarding answering emails on minutia (which this certainly qualifies as). Why not email Okuda (or whoever was the designer of this scene) and ASK?
Or does that defeat the purpose...
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Ok, ok I was a bit harsh saying we blow the people who do not believe it is a ship back to The New Order Forums, and that I was one-sided in that saying. So, I must agree, you may all have your opinions. It may or may not be a ship. Now, for those of you that say the ship is DEFINITELY NOT ONE, THAT THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY IT COULD BE A SHIP, then I'd give you the finger, but it is a computer.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Although, TNO needs members, it has 0 registered users...
Posted by HappyTarget (Member # 670) on :
I agree with those that think its a ship. It blends in with the rest of the starbase structure becuse its obviously inactive (no running lights, no spotlights). It seems out of place to be part of the starbase. For those of you that insist on saying what it aint, come up with some believable suggestions as to what it could be. Just saying that it aint a ship and leaving it at that isn't goning to bring anyone around to your way of thinking.
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Um, some believable postulations to the not-a-ship theory have been presented. Construction mondule? Traffic control module? Shuttle/workbee refueling station?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
What's with all this EFH bashing?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Now, for those of you that say the ship is DEFINITELY NOT ONE, THAT THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY IT COULD BE A SHIP, then I'd give you the finger, but it is a computer."
Erm... I don't think anyone is saying that. You're the only ones saying anything definite. The rest of us are saying that it's either a ship or not, but we have no reason to say either way.
Posted by mrneutron (Member # 524) on :
Interesting.
I must confess that my laser disc player must have hiccoughed when I went to the spacedock scene because that shot posted earlier didn't show itself. Most peculiar.
I went back and checked again, and I'm going to have to agree that the object is question is matted into the shot. It doesn't match the spacedock interior colors, as it does in the publicity photo.
I don't necessrily agree about the specific details being argued over, but in light of the evidence I'm going to weigh in on the side of it being a ship of some sort.
As to who at ILM might be able to identify the mystery object, it would have to be someone who worked on the scene, like Ren Ralstrom, Scott Farrar or Don Dow. This was before Okuda's time ( he started with Trek on ST4).
I re-read the Cinefex piece on ST3, but unfortunately they make no reference to anything in the spacedock but the Enterprise, Excelsior and shuttles.
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
It is deffinitely a composite of some sort.... one thing is certain, it is NOT part of the starbase.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
As per the comments on Page 5 of this thread. This ship has NACELLES - they sit on the upper front edge of the 'trapezoid' area. There is also a mini saucer on the front leading edge of teh 'trapezoid'.
Also - the picture posted with the red circles - make it even more clear that it is not a part of the station - since it is not 'perpendicular' to the 'arm' of the station... it is at an angle - thus allowing that shadowy gap to appear.
Also - can someone check Star Trek IV - for the ship - if it's not a part of the 'arm' then it's not a fixed structure.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Oh, also - just cause it doesn't have any 'running' lights - doesn't mean its not a ship - it could be just powered down... while it's in Space Dock...
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
If it's a ship, where is the model of it then? Someone at ILM had to have built a model of this thing if it were in a matte.
For all we know, the thing COULD be attached to Spacedock, and it's actually an L-Shape. The connection could be behind the ship, where we can't see.
As for the nacelles, those are NOT Constitution nacelles. At least, they are not identical to Constitution nacelles:
1) Look at the Enterprise. Notice how there is a small circular grille, then a slanted section, then more grille? Notice how small the slanted section is? Now look at the "thing". Big friggin space between the two "grilles" there.
2) The "grilles" run to the very back of the nacelle. The grilles on a Constitution end much earlier.
3) The back of the nacelles on the Constitution are slanted inward, the opposite direction of the front of the nacelle. The slant on the back of the "thing's" nacelles is in the same direction as the front.
4) The bottom of the "thing's" nacelles are flat. The bottom of a Constitution's nacelle raises up a bit toward the back, plus there is a small fin at the very end.
Also notice the shadow in the publicity pic. You can clearly see the shadow of the "nacelle", but where is the shadow of the "saucer"? The saucer is obviously sitting higher then the nacelles, so why isn't it there?
Well, maybe the light source is coming from the bottom. OK, then why is there a giant shadow on the bottom? If the light source was from the top, then the nacelles wouldn't even appear at all! The shadows were mostly likely added by ILM (since comparing the ST3 screencap to this publicity shot, they obviously cleaned this thing up). They obviously screwed up in their altering of the image to add those shadows.
BTW, anyone care to try and get a size reference of the Phase II Enterprise? You could compare it to the size of the Excelsior sitting next to the large structure...
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
Good points, The359. Those definitely are not Constitution-style nacelles. If they are nacelles, I think they'd be closer in appearance to the Oberth-style. That's what I was thinking as I highlighted the damn things. Plus, it's hard to tell which way the things would be facing if they were nacelles.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
I don't think you'd see the saucer, cause it looks like - from the shadow - that the nacelles sit out from the rest of the ship a little - forwards. The Sauer seems to sit at the middle front of the ship - but not jutting all the way out.
That Phase II excelsior try-out looks MASSIVE compared to the Ent.
Anyone else notice that The Excelsior is lit up by those spot lights - and then if you look under the arm that is partly obscuring the Phase II ship - it too has spot lights pointing up at it. There are also some more spot-lights behind the 'right arm' (the arm behind the Excelsior)... I'm guessing there might be another ship parked back there.
Andrew
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Can someone post the cap of the Phase II in Space dock? I haven't seen it yet.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Um, I think it's on the previous page.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Actually, it's on page 4.
And, now that I look at it, yeah, the McQuarrie ship looks like it might be roughly the size of the Excelsior...
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
OK, now looking at the screencap again, this thing is definatly not attached to the wall, at least not the parts we can see. I have highlighted the "ship" and the "shadow", since I just noticed that there was even a shadow there at all.
I noticed it when I saw the tiny bluish object that was for some reason just stuck in the middle of the whole black area. Well, this is the ship's left (from out point of view) "nacelle"
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
If this is a structure, it's the only "external" structure we can see. The rest of the walls are all smooth...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Sol: What's EFH bashing?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
EFH being an acronym for Emergency Forum Hologram, which was someone's (perhaps my) pet name for TNO.
Posted by mrneutron (Member # 524) on :
In a previous posts I said I had looked at ST3 and ST4. The object in question appears in ST3, but not in the ST4 spacedock scenes.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Oh, OK, then its a possibility that this isn't a permanent structure of the Starbase arm (the cargo ship).
Just also wondering - even though it was just Starbase stuffing - I wonder why the pre-excels. couldn't give chase on the Enterprise. Was it that the Enterprise had set all the speed records and that it was the fastest ship - and that the only ship that could hope to overrun the Enterprise was the Transwarp Excelsior!?!
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
It's possible the other ships were "shut down" and it would have taken too long to start them up and then get them out of Spacedock for persuit.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
True. Although were there NO ships between Earth and the Genesis planet? None at all that could have given chase?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
The other ship needn't even have been "shut down", as such. For all we know, it was in Spacedock for repairs or upgrades, and was in no condition to fly out of the place at all.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
And the smaller ships that must have been swarming the vicinity would either not have been fast enough on long chases, or not have had anything like the required firepower to stop the Enterprise.
Also, Genesis must have been pretty close to Earth for Kirk to have reached it so quickly in ST2. Heck, *Khan* reached that location using his ancient, apparently sublight-only ship (unless Kirk really went out of his way to find him a new planet at the end of "Space Seed"). The trip in ST3 didn't take much time, either. Ceti Alpha must be in the immediate vicinity of Earth, really.
...Which would also be supported by the fact that nebulae of a certain type are known as "Mutara class nebulae", as we repeatedly heard in Voyager. What floated next to Ceti Alpha was THE Mutara nebula, the forefather of them all. Apparently, this was the first such nebula to be encountered by Earthlings. Presumably, such midget nebulae are virtually invisible from Earth, and can only be located by space travelers.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
"Also, Genesis must have been pretty close to Earth for Kirk to have reached it so quickly in ST2. Heck, *Khan* reached that location using his ancient, apparently sublight-only ship (unless Kirk really went out of his way to find him a new planet at the end of "Space Seed")."
Kahn got to Regula 1 and the Genesis planet on the Reliant, not the Botany Bay. the Reliant could have easily used to warp after leavng Ceti Alpha V (for an unknown amount of time). Likewise, Kirk engaged warp when he headed for Regula 1 (and was intercepted), and although it seems like a short amount of time, we don't really have any figures to throw about.
I'd say the Enterprise was the only ship within range (or "the quadrant" as it was put in ST II), implying it was not near Earth, but according to ST:TMP, Star Trek Generations and "Paradise Lost", Earth has a tendancy to leave itself undefended, apart from one ship.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Regarding the proximity of "Ceti Alpha"... The real Alpha Ceti is about 220ly away.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I stand corrected - due to an acute case of telepathic possession by a particularly dim yet PSI-active dachshund, I momentarily thought that Regula I was in the same system with the Ceti Alpha planets. Which is the one thing we KNOW to be impossible.
Incidentally, where are all the pictures of Oberth study models? I'd think lots of effort would have been put in designing that ship for ST3, just like the Excelsior design was refined through the use of physical study models. It just strikes me as interesting that the mysterious vessel at Spacedock would have the same saucer-flanked-by-tiny-nacelles design that ended up being used in the Grissom. Perhaps the mystery ship in fact *is* an early Grissom, rather than something deliberately built to enrich the Spacedock scene?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Very good point indeed. I thought the same thing. And I can vaguely remember having seen some pic of one of the Oberth class study models in some book. Unfortunately I don't have that book. I was on holiday in England and scanning through that book in a store in Liverpool.
Anyway, that ship looked roughly like the "object" we are all argueing about here. Oh and count me in on that "I believe it COULD be a ship but I'm not sure" - faction!
Bernd, if you are around, what is your take on the object in question?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Okay, Liam, we need you to go out and look through every Trek book in every store in Liverpool and find us that picture, 'kay? :-)
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
And if you find it, we may have a special surprise for you...yes...yes...this...um......
PIECE OF PRINTER PAPER! Yeah, kickass, you gotta love these kinda prizes! Now go find that book, or no Printer Paper for you!!!
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
We should give him a toy Yoda.
Posted by HappyTarget (Member # 670) on :
Carefull, he might sue us for misrepresentaiton! A couple of pages back, I seemed to offend the "its not a ship" side of our littl argument. I apologise. I didnt mean that none of you came up with plausable counter arguments. What I meant was that most just disagreed and left it at that. You also should support your stance like the "its a ship side" has done. Their evidence convinced me. Come up with convincing evidence as to what you think it is and I may change my stance. As a side note, this topic should say something to certain producers when they take too much liberty with certain accepted details of the Star Trek Universe. Look at how much effort is being put into identifying a small chunk of the background used for only a few seconds in one movie! Im all for a little creative licence, but ya gotta walk a fine line or you may end up alenating your core fan base.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I don't go back to Liverpool for another couple of months, sorry.
I could go and check every book store in London, but since that would take roughly 9 million years (and Yanks would keep telling me to go to "Hugh Grant's shop", despite the fact that it doesn't exist, and, if it did, it sold MAPS anyway), so I'll need a stronger incentive.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Do you remember the shop in Liverpool?? Do you remember the book?? RING THEM!?!
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Great idea. Apart from the fact that I live in Germany and this was only on holiday - and three years ago. But I remember the book store's name: it was "Dillons" opposite Liverpool Central station. I don't recall the name of the book. It was a "coffee table" book - stylish, full color and about the same size as "The Art of Star Trek". I think it was blue on the outside and had a Federation badge on the front.
Hope this helps a little. Sorry, but I remember neither the name of the book nor the publisher. At the time I just scanned through this book. I thought it was great but just too expensive.
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
About the Excelsior in Trek 3, I may have to go back to the video, but I could of sworn the only reason transwarp didnt work while it chased the enterprise was Scotty removed something from the Excelsior. Captain Styles said something along the lines of "They will regret that...". The overall tone and mood of the chase out of the starbase sugested that the Excelsior was already in the middle of transwarp testing, and had already achieved transwarp, and was ready to chase the enterprise using it.
[ August 01, 2001: Message edited by: Wes1701E ]
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
There's loads of Dillons all over the country. I know someone who works at one. I'll check it out.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The reason the Excelsior stalled out, sure. But I find it really hard to believe that a few missing spark plugs would be enough to scrap the whole transwarp project. There had to have been other problems with the setup.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yes. Possibly it burned fuel like a US cars engine. Or maybe it was extremely unstable. Or perhaps the speed increase just wasn't dramatic enough. Or perhaps advances in normal warp drive made it unecessary. Or perhaps it was successful, but it just amounted to a standard speed increase, and the over excited PR boys who dramatically called it "transwarp" were fired, and it just reverted to being called "warp, but a bit faster"?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
That book... hard-cover... blue... with a badge... I've never seen something like that... could it be one of those LUG books??
Also, maybe Transwarp was applied to new increases in Warp... but still was warp - not the funky different type(s) seen in Voyager?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Andrew: what's LUG? I've tried all the regular publishers' websites (simon & schuster et al) as well as amazon.com to find the book, but to no avail. Damn!
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
LUG: Last Unicorn Games. A Star Trek RPG, IIRC.
Posted by NeghVar (Member # 62) on :
Any recent news on this book? Never seen it myself, but if it exists...it must be added to my collection...
Thanks! Art
Posted by pIn'a' Sov (Member # 293) on :
Well, let�s continue the debate, here�s my latest scan: Space dock "ship" Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Nice scan, but I don't think there's anything more to debate about. After nine pages on this topic, the general consensus is that some people think it's a ship, and some people don't. Without any further info from the people responsible for setting up the scene, there's no way to tell who is right.
Posted by pIn'a' Sov (Member # 293) on :
Yeah, I guess you�re right I just wanted to see what kind of reaction I�d get....
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I read page one and page nine. I'm extremely frightened by what the middle pages contain, and therefor abstain. I think its part of the wall, but I would be willing to say its a ship if you drew a blueprint.
Of course it wouldnt be canon. I had an idea. Let's break into the set for Star Trek X when its being filmed, and put all of our favorite non-canon images on a CD and overwrite some of Okuda's graphics for the background monitors. Then they film it, and maybe you can see a little bit of te dreadnought or a shuttlecarrier behind Picard-clone's head. BOOM instant canonicity!!! Then they will have to listen to the creative fanboys... going insane...., captain
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
It cannot be apart of the wall, if you look at the actual film footage you can see that this is definatly a composited image with a definate matt line and the normal discolouration. this last image was taken from a publicity photo that has been touched up, so the object in question looks like a part of the wall...but it isn't...
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Never mind.. i just read the middle pages and somebody did draw a blueprint.. can i have permission to add in to my encyclopedia?
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
sure, go right ahead
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
And I modified it on Adobe to get this, since I think the nacelles are at the front of the ship since in the TAoST pic shows them facing that way. Yes, it's facing to the right.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
if you thinks so, but please don't modify my images, do your own if u think its wrong.
BTW, did anyone else notice that the aft end of this thing looks suspiciously like the impulse engines on the STVI executive shuttle, and later the Sydney-class? Could explain why know has seen it before, it got stripped & reused.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
At least I asked permission to use it thougfh. I have not been so generous when it comes to using my 'Save As" button.. i know a few people that might be mad if they see my size comparison chart, okuda and pocket books nonwithstanding
Posted by Wes1701E (Member # 212) on :
)
