Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Rigel Class

This is topic Rigel Class in forum Starships & Technology at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/6/875.html

Posted by Akula (Member # 319) on :

I just had a idea that I thought I might bring up.
Why Can't the Proto-Nebula ship be the Rigel?
If you consider the following facts it makes a lot of since.
1. The Rigel's registrion number is to high for any of the other vessels.
2. This ship no longer has a name as the Melbourne was more clearly seen as a Excelsior Class vessel.
3. The ship has many design differences from the final nebula and if this vessel was in fact the prototype for the nebula class vessel it would have to have been named the Nebula. However I believe that this vessel has far to many differences to even be a prototype for the class.
4. If it was the Rigel it could be reasoned that this class was the one which the Nebula Class was derived from.
John

------------------

Posted by Yakaspat The Trekker (Member # 355) on :

Two problems with that:

1) The ship in question is the USS Melbourne, and it has been identified already as a Nebula Class. Admittedly, it was a proto-Nebula, but, a Nebula nonetheless.

2) Mike Okuda says he can't recall whether a Rigel was built for that episode or not, and, it seems that the ship wasn't actually seen onscreen at all. The Rigel is the most ellusive ship at Wolf 359, granted. But since the Melbourne was so clearly seen, it is unlikely Mike would be so vague as to whether it was filmed or not, if it were indeed the Rigel Class Tolstoy.

Nice idea, though.

Lance http://thetrekker.homestead.com

------------------
TheTrekker's Officer's Bible: A Concise Review of the Starfleet
http://thetrekker.homestead.com

Posted by Akula (Member # 319) on :

Personally I think that they did make a Rigel Class model and a Challenger Class model meeting the discription by Mike (at the Slide Show) but they didn't shoot them because of there designs. However if they didn't my idea would make since.

Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :

If you want to think that, that's fine...unfortunately the evidence is against it. For the former description of the Rigel, it's been pretty much cleared that it actually applied to Greg Jein's Niagara class, once the picture of the actual studio model was unearthed. For the Challenger class, there was only one model built-the Galaxy type one. The model was built by Ed Miarecki, and when Chris Spinnler emailed him months ago with a diagram of the former description of the ship(Constitution/Constellation type design), Ed stated that he never built a model like that.

BTW, If anyone is planning to email Miarecki on the subject...don't. He was a bit annoyed about the whole thing the last time, and you can get the info anyway by going to Bernd Schneider's or Chris's site.

------------------
Bart: "Hey, Dad, I'll trade you this delicious doorstop for that crummy old danish."
Homer: "Done and done...D'oh!"

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

There was almost certainly no model built to be the Rigel class, as the Tolstoy wasn't even conceived of until after the fact.

------------------
"It's like the Star of David or something. But without the whole Judaism thing."
-Frank Gerratana, 17-Aug-2000

Posted by Alpha Centauri (Member # 338) on :

Yeah, dubbing "Tolstoy" over "Chekov" after the shooting... You *are* referring to that, don't you TSN?

------------------
"And as we all know, a mesolytic quantumvector resonator is commonly
used to polarize isogravitic plasma-flux manifolds."

Starfleet Academy's Redshirt Guide to the Starfleet, 62nd edition,
2376.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

I'm not sure if they dubbed it in, or if they changed it before filming Shelby's line. But, either way, I think they filmed the wreckage before changing it.

------------------
"It's like the Star of David or something. But without the whole Judaism thing."
-Frank Gerratana, 17-Aug-2000

Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :

Conjecture:
My personal impression is that the Proto-Nebula in BoBW is actually the Nebula prototype, the USS Nebula. The ship had been fitted with to additional nacelles since there were problems with the main nacelles.

------------------
"Species 5618, human. Warp-capable, origin grid 325, physiology inefficient, below average cranium capacity, minimum redundant systems, limited regenerative abilities."
Ex Astris Scientia

Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :

The Battle of Wolf 359 would be the only instance in Starfleet history where we could reasonably expect to see such semi-operational, mostly-failed prototypes. Such barely combatworthy ships would probably be stored near Earth/Mars where major starship development work usually seems to take place. Thus, they would be available for Wolf 359 last-ditch defence, even though no admiral in possession of his faculties would ever deploy them in deep space.

The four-nacelled Excelsior model would be another prototype not placed in operational use (the telescoping hull makes her virtually useless in any role except as a propulsion-system testbed). In addition, the Fleet Museum could be on Earth orbit and might yield some ships for Wolf as well - another thing that could never happen elsewhere in the Federation.

The Nebula-ish ship being USS Nebula is an idea I like very much. It would help explain why all the tabletop models we have seen feature this long-tailed secondary hull - Starfleet manufactured and distributed official kits of USS Nebula to all starships for use as Nebula-class decoration back when they believed the production-model Nebulas would share the long tail. They also included a couple of accessories to the kit, so that Riker in "Future Imperfect" might choose the additional nacelles (which I still prefer to think of as inert cargo..), Maxwell would glue on a roll bar in "The Wounded", and Sisko would use the triangular "battle pod" in his office model. When the production ships ended up looking different, Starfleet did not bother to distribute an amended official tabletop model.

While I do think that calling this ship the Rigel class Tolstoy is an idea with some merit, such a solution would not allow for the above rationalization.

Timo Saloniemi

Posted by Joshua Bell (Member # 327) on :

Another thought re: the tiny nacelles.

It's possible that the Nebula prototype, whose design may predate the Galaxy prototype if we look at the registry numbers, was a testbed capable of saucer separation and the smaller nacelles allow the saucer to go into warp. By the time the Galaxy prototype/Nebula production came around, inboard warp sustainer engines were developed.

It's a pretty lame idea, though; full-blown nacelles imply a full-blown warp core, which defeats the purpose of a backup system - although if they were handy from a smaller New Orleans-type ship perhaps they were just bolted on to the prototype as-is. Also, separation of the Nebula isn't as big a win as for the Galaxy (get the fragile saucer out of battle - at least, that was the idea).

But I like the idea that what we're seeing is the equivalent of the space shuttle Enterprise OV-101, with the drop-test engine cover cone in place. Models came out with that cone, despite the fact that no production orbiter ever sported it operationally. Additionally, the plan was originally to upgrade Enterprise to a functional orbiter, but drop tests had weakened the frame; the structural test article STA-099 was refit to become Challenger OV-99 instead. Had things gone the other way, Enterprise models with the cone might still be the widely deployed kit, with after-market replacement stickers for the other orbiter names.

Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :

Actually the cone was and still is an operational component of the Space Shuttle Orbiters. The cone is only used when the orbiter vehicle is transported atop the Shuttle Carrier 747. Its used to reduce the drag created by vortices around the engine nozzle bells which would reduce the overall performance of the mated vehicle.

Shipbuilder

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

Can I ask what are all the names of the shuttles?

I was watching a doco, and it mentioned that there were five shuttles ??in service??

I thought there was just

Atlantis
Discovery
Columbia

left

Maybe the included the Enterprise and the Callenger?

Andrew

------------------
"I threw bitter tears at the ocean
But all that came back was the tide..." 'I Will Not Forget You' Sarah McLachlan

Posted by grb on :

Originally, there were four shuttles built:
columbia
challenger
atlantis
discovery

After the destruction of the challenger, s replacement shuttle, the endevour, was built. currently, the four operational shuttles are:
columbia
atlantis
discovery
endevour

------------------

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :

The one most people don't know about is OV-98, the shuttle Pathfinder. While not a TRUE orbiter, it's still considered "one of the family." Have a look...

------------------
"There are three things I HATE, Jet: kids..pets..& women with attitudes. So WHY do we have all THREE on BOARD?!?"--Spike Spiegel

Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :

The Buran, is there any info on this orbiter? I heard that the Russians DID get it into space, unmanned, but it is now just sitting around...

Andrew

------------------
"I threw bitter tears at the ocean
But all that came back was the tide..." 'I Will Not Forget You' Sarah McLachlan

Posted by Shipbuilder (Member # 69) on :

Here ya go Andrew. This is an awesome website that has detailed info about Buran among lots of other stuff. http://www.friends-partners.org/~mwade/spaceflt.htm