Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on November 14, 2001 07:23 AM:
I would 'ave ter second yer there! Oi! 'oly poo! Blimey!
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on November 14, 2001 07:26 AM:
It looks good, but not yet "poo" quality, I say.
Posted by The Vorlon (Member # 52) on November 14, 2001 09:19 AM:
Hey, good! Gerard finally got his page up! He'd been supplying my blueprints for years... =]
Speaking of schematics, would anyone like scans of the 1701-C blueprints from the 2002 TNG calender? They are by far the most accurate diagrams of the ship ever...
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on November 14, 2001 09:21 AM:
Duh! Please!
Mark <--- E-C nut
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on November 14, 2001 09:44 AM:
Yes, by all means!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on November 14, 2001 12:21 PM:
What was the reason for them using the E-C blue-prints this year? Any particular reason?
Andrew
Posted by Gerard Gillan (Member # 684) on November 14, 2001 03:10 PM:
Well to the gentleman who said Poo to the site. Please point me to yout Url of the same subject and I can give you my opinion.
I have been at this for 3 Years scanning learning HTML, PhotoShop 6.0 programme, Corel Draw 9.0 graphic programme just to mention a few things etc.
You cannot please every body.. but thank you for taking the time to view my site and making a comment. Its is still under Construction.
Gilso
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on November 14, 2001 03:43 PM:
Hi Gerard - my "poo" comment was a compliment to your work, as a potentially humourous alternative to saying "shit". My apologies if that was misinterpreted as an insult, which is far from the truth. The site rocks, man!
Mark
Posted by Gerard Gillan (Member # 684) on November 14, 2001 05:25 PM:
Mark I was not refering to your good self I understand your "Poo" statement, that you where taken back by the site in general. The quality and the quantity was better than what you had come to expect....
My statment was directed at Veers Senior Member # 661 who make his opinion at this notice board. I thank him for his time anyway and well no matter how hard you try, there will always be people who are just out to try and put people down...
And just to finally put the nail into the coffin on the "Poo" statement. The idea of the design of the site was to give a blueprint/schematic but under construction feel to the site, redrawing and improving on a design etc, if you look at the title headers they have construction arrows on them..
Use the nav graphic's and you see they change with a mouse over effect to solid text. This was the idea.
Such is with the world..
The site still needs fine tuning, on the index page, I still have to add the Comments section, links page and a counter etc...
Thanks to all who have visited my site and made there comments welcome, specially to Adam the Vorlon, his work I have greatly admired over the years and helped him develop his own charts...
Gerard
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on November 14, 2001 09:30 PM:
Nice Gerard. The site looks great and there're alot of neat pics. Is that Nova Class MSD official? It looks cool but I don't think I've ever seen it before.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on November 14, 2001 10:20 PM:
I have seen it around but I'm not sure if it is original. It does have incorrectly placed forward torpedo launchers and other errors, but I'd guess the real thing could have those as well.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on November 14, 2001 10:26 PM:
Saladin Saladin Saladin
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on November 15, 2001 12:11 AM:
POOO!
In a good way, of course. Great site. I'd love to see Enterprise in those size-comp charts, though.
Posted by Gerard Gillan (Member # 684) on November 15, 2001 05:06 AM:
Some body ask for a look at the Enterprise-C schematics from the 2002 TNG calander..
Posted by PopMaze (Member # 302) on November 15, 2001 06:33 AM:
Holy crap! That's one sweet set of blueprints of the Ent-C. Is that foward torp launcher actually two small launchers? It looks like it.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on November 15, 2001 06:43 AM:
It's SALADIN, you misspelled it on your page as SADALIN. We were just trying to tell you to correct it.
While you're at it, you're history write-up on the DS9 schematics needs to be checked, there are a load of sentence fragments and it makes no sense.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on November 15, 2001 09:58 AM:
Wow. Really nice, Gerard. Really, really nice. So the outlines were done in CorelDraw? Damn. Very great job. Very impressive.
Posted by Gerard Gillan (Member # 684) on November 15, 2001 10:15 AM:
I accept that I made an error in spelling the word Saladin and thank you for pointing this out.
The DS9 History was an idea, but the feedback from other people say that it really does not go well. I will update when I can..
Well again thanks to everyone who has help me out this day, will be in touch soon.
Gilso
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on November 15, 2001 03:22 PM:
Er...woah.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on November 15, 2001 09:18 PM:
The "wire framing" on those Ent-C blueprints are actually the hull plate divisions. I have the AMT model and it looks very similar to that. It looks like there's a mesh laid over the whole thing.
I think the reason it looks funky is because the outlines of the ship aren't thicker.
