OK, here's the real reason why I'm here. Found this board several months ago, but never had the time to post (but thanks to Flatrate, I finally have ). I think now it's time to start. Read through the topics and I really have to say: wow. This seems to be the right place.
No first post without a reason: I hope anyone can help me (sorry if this has been dicussed over and over again, but you know, my license plate still reads 'newbie'.). Does anyone have any information regarding the mysterious little type of ship we all know as the 'Yeager-class'? I searched the net for hours but all I found was the 'we had the same idea at the same time'-story regarding her namesake, a member of the Sabre-class and the 'this has been confirmed by a guy at paramount'-tale. Don't know if I can believe it or not, but there has to be a name or something. Or is this some kind of 'Centaur-joke'? I mean the fact that everyone believes the Centaur was a member of the Centaur-class. Maybe only the ship's name was Yeager? Any registry maybe?
And before you ask: Yes, I am the guy from the TrekBBS, thanks for spreading the information about the 'Ron Moore', MMoM! Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
Hello Cpt. Kyle Amasov and welcome to Flare!
From the Star Trek Encyclopedia:
"Yeager, U.S.S. Federation starship, Saber-class, Starfleet registry number NCC-61947. The Yeager was among the ships defending Sector 001 against the Borg incursion of 2373. (Star Trek: First Contact). Named for test pilot Chuck Yeager, the first human to fly faster than the speed of sound."
Of course we in the UK spell the class name in the correct fashion: S-A-B-R-E.
I have heard rumours of another sort of ship using the name Yeager - but it was for a class, the one on page 158 of the DS9TM I believe.
Hope that helps you in your search Cpt. Kyle Amasov!
(D'OH! Forgot the quotation marks! Silly me!)
[ February 03, 2002, 12:44: Message edited by: akb1979 ]
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Heya Amasov,
The Yeager is believed to be a kitbash mixing Revell-Monogram's Intrepid and Maquis Raider models into a somewhat sloppy ship we see circling the station in some of the shots from the late 5th season onwards. (The various models are built to different scales, so it makes for a peculiar dilemma when explaining this thing's origins.)
Apparently, the modelmakers dubbed her the Yeager (I don't think we're sure whether the actual ship was named this or the design was named this), and unbeknownst to them Alex Jaeger had already slapped the same name on his Sabre CGI model for use during the Borg battle in ST:FC.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
As for the Centaur, it is (or should be, damn it!) more proper to refer to it as a Centaur type ship, rather than class.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: As for the Centaur, it is (or should be, damn it!) more proper to refer to it as a Centaur type ship, rather than class.
I don't like the term 'Centaur-class'. But either it's a 'class' or nothing at all. We surely could call it a Centaur-type, but that wouldn't hepl that much. The Centaur is the only ship of that class currently known, so just saying 'the Centaur' is all right, IMO. I really hope it's not a standard-Excelsior. I mean, how long did the war last until we saw the ship and the Shelly? Three months? Do you really think Starfleet could kitbash several new ships in three months?
Now the rest:
quote:Originally posted by akb1979: I have heard rumours of another sort of ship using the name Yeager - but it was for a class, the one on page 158 of the DS9TM I believe.
Yup. That's the one I mean. The ugly thing from the DS9TM.
Who came up with the class designation 'Yeager'? Is there anyone out there who might know more about the ship's name or NCC? I concidered asking Okuda, but I have no idea if he knows.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Of course we in the UK spell the class name in the correct fashion: S-A-B-R-E."
For "correct" read "French".
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
We're never going to see the Centaur again, so might as well call it a Centaur-class ship and have done with it. Either that, or give it the name of a class we know exists but have never seen: Chimera-class is my own preference.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, calling it "Centaur-class" is like suggesting that the Centaur just happened to be the class ship. Which is much less likely than its being just a random production ship.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
If the word was adapted from the French, why should we change the spelling, oh great Nixpicker. Besides, "Saber" conflicts with the correct spellings of "Centre" and "Litre" Posted by Phelps (Member # 713) on :
There is no such thing as an absolutely correct spelling. Spellings change. The meanings of words change.
I prefer Sabre because it looks more feminine, more appropriate for a ship. On the other hand, Alex Jaeger spelled it "Saber" in an e-mail. The Steamrunner was to have been STREAMrunner also (after a song of a Christian band, the Zandura is something on that album also IIRC), but it accidentally got approved as Steamrunner, which is ok by him (high-tech/low-tech combo).
As for the Centaur, the DS9TM explains that *some* of the kitbashes were deemed good enough to become full classes, which is consistent with the fact that most haven't been seen again. One really has to match the Star Trek and the real-world situations, in which almost every kitbash is a one-off ship. Therefore, it's more likely that the Centaur, being a kitbash, is a classless ship.
[ February 03, 2002, 18:47: Message edited by: Phelps ]
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Apparently, the Zandura is named after a group called Fold Zandura. Found this out after doing a web search on the Zandura, hoping to find any information I didn't already know.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phelps: Therefore, it's more likely that the Centaur, being a kitbash, is a classless ship.
Of course, officially, it's an Excelsior-class variant.
-MMoM Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
'For "correct" read "French".'
For "correct" read "used by almost all the English speaking world appart from that one country that doesn't seem to realise that it didn't actually invent the language, and that yes, "Pakie" isn't a good way to refer to people from Pakistan".
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Just because the war started three-months before the Centaur was seen doesn't mean that in the Star Trek timeline they had three months to get the ship ready or it was it's own Class. I have the feeling that Starfleet would have started to work on getting together an emergency fleet ever since the first Borg incursion. Among those ships could have been a bunch of salvaged partial builds that are stored away in mothballs until they are needed.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Given that the Centaur had an NCC number, it goes against Sternbach's notion that lots of the kitbashed ships were sent out without them. I'm in camp that says the Centaur is a member of some class contemporary with the Excelsior - possibly with some ties with the Constellation class, given all the crap that's all over the underside (and possibly top?) of the saucer.
Mark <--- Ah pity d'foo who likes this starship!
Posted by Fedaykin Supastar (Member # 704) on :
Ooh Pity Me!!!!!
hehe, i've only see that ship once (IIRC) and can't really remember how it looks, is it any worth trying to find a screen cap of it?
Buzz
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Pedro's site has the best screen caps I've seen. But there are only so many caps out there since the ship was only on screen for a few seconds.
Like the Yeager Class, the Centaur was a kitbash of ERTL's Reliant and Excelsior model kits with greeblies added on the underside.
I like the ship, personally and if I could still find the models anywhere, I'd probably get them and make one of my own Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
There exists a "garage kit" by Victory Productions for converting an Excelsior, without the need for a Miranda kit. Now all you need is the vital parts of an Excelsior...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Um, I like the idea that the Centaur is of the CHIMERA class - which we know exists. It (I think has Excelsior contemporary registries) and it fits with the 'mythic creature' aspect. To me, it could be the 'mirandarised' version of the Excelsior that we've never seen... we already have the 'miranda'/'connie' and the 'nebbie'/'galaxy', we were GOING to have a Ambassador version in one TNG ep - but it fell through cause of money... and there was going to be a Sovvie version in FC but was scrapped.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Sorry but I don't think it's a good idea, Andrew. The only known Chimera-class ship has a rego of 57418. I personally think that's too high for an Excelsior alike design.
I agree it's fair to say that the Centaur is the Miranda-ized Excelsior. The Steamrunner-class is probably the closest to a Miranda-ized Sovereign. But yes, there's nothing we know of that could possibly go with Ambassador.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
About a year ago, I came up with a hypothesis about which classes the Centaur & the Curry belonged to. Basically, I took their registry numbers and added the ships to my shiplist, which coincidentally, is grouped by chronological registry numbers. Guess what? The two closest conjectural classes to the ships were the Renaissance and the Mediterranean. So what, you say? Well, I also took clues from statements made about the ships from the Ren & Med classes, namely the Aries & the Lalo, respectively.
First, the Aries is described by Kyle Riker as a small scoutship. I immediately thought of the Centaur. If you note, even though she has an Excelsior-type saucer, it must be scaled down, because the whole ship is only about as big as the Jem'Hadar fighter. Second, the Lalo is described by both Will Riker and Adm. Hanson as a Starfleet freighter. Well, rearrange the components of the Excelsior into what we see for the Curry, and it certainly looks like a frieghter-ized Excelsior.
Add these to the fact that most ships in the 4XXXX range are Excelsiors, and that the only two other classes with 4XXXX registries are the Ren & Med, it is not unreasonable to assume that the 42043 Centaur and the 45617 Curry are indeed ships of those classes.
Of course, all of these hypotheses are based on the fact that the regos are chronological, which I happen to believe (except in the case of TOS, but that's a whole other story).
quote:But yes, there's nothing we know of that could possibly go with Ambassador.
Actually, there may be. There's a rumor going around the internet that the unseen design for the Apollo class U.S.S. Gage model was indeed a Miranda-ized Ambassador. I found the design at Sci-fi Art or somewhere, where the artist claimed he had firsthand knowledge of the model. Registry-wise, the Apollo class does jibe with the earliest Ambassadors. However, until there's more proof, we can't consider this design to be canon.
[ February 04, 2002, 08:54: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...'Saber' conflicts with the correct spellings of 'Centre' and 'Litre'"
But there was no such Latin word as "sabrum" or "sabra", as opposed to "centrum" and "litra". "Sabre" came from "sable", which came from "sabel" (Greek). Apparently that came from the Polish "szabla", but that's so far off from the current word that it's hard to use to determine anything.
"...42043 Centaur..."
Eh?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
NCC-42043 is the registry of the Centaur, per the Fact Files.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
NCC-42043 was the number we got during a painstaking analysis of the clip, since pausing or capping obscured the rego. I've done it myself.
Mark
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Really? The registry was on the model? I thought the Fact Files just made it up.
Man, someone really needs to email Doug Drexler about the other models he based his drawings on for the DS9 tech manual...
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I have little problem with labeling the Centaur as a Renaissance, or the Curry as a Mediterranean. In fact, both could be built around a smaller variant of the Excelsior saucer, one that fits in with those Constitution-style nacelles of the Curry (and possibly even with the Miranda torpedo pod of the Centaur, but that's a lesser problem). Thankfully, an Excelsior saucer does not have easily identifiable scaling features like blatantly obvious deflector grid patterns, portholes or docking ports...
The Centaur needs a shuttlebay in order to be compatible with "Identity Crisis" where a shuttlepod from the Aries was seen. Then again, a type 15 pod doesn't need much space. Perhaps the strange sawtooth patterns on the ventral surface of the torpedo pod/secondary hull are doors for a ventral shuttlebay? In any case, the Centaur is not really a "Miranda-ized Excelsior" if it's so much smaller than its parent design. Perhaps a "Springfield-ized Galaxy" would be better - different nacelles, different scale, same hull shapes.
It's not completely satisfactory to have ships with 42-45000 range regos and TOS movie era components, but that's what we have to live with. Apparently, Excelsior tech didn't make a breakthrough with USS Excelsior yet, but took its own sweet time to become widespread.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Incidentally, does anybody know where I could find a diagram of the Curry with the nacelles correctly proportioned?
That is, one where the nacelles are true to the screen appearance, and not scaled down to fit the perception that they must be Constitution nacelles bolted to an Excelsior saucer?
I'm sure somebody must have made a diagram like that, and done the associated measurements and calculations. Or do I really have to do it all myself?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I don't even know where to place the saucer in relation to the secondary hull. From the perspective in 'A Time to Stand' you can't see anything. And sadly we have no other pictures of the model.
Posted by Dax (Member # 191) on :
Timo makes a good point with regards to the Curry. By "correcting" the size of the nacelles in diagrams it is actually making the drawing less accurate of what's canon.
OTOH, I think it's even worse to treat the saucers of the Curry and Centaur as something smaller than the Excelsior. We know they are built from Excelsior saucers (and engineering hull w/ the Curry) and scaling those is far more problematic than simple nacelles.
Another thing, wouldn't it be best to place the Curry as Renaissance-class? That way all known ships of the class would be together, in order, on my shiplist. The Centaur is currently smack-bang in-between the large group of Excelsiors on my list.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
The only problem with that is that the Curry looks nothing like a small scout ship.
Timo: You bring up an interesting point. The whole reason why the Ambassador class looks the way it does was because Okuda, Sternbach, et. al wanted a design that fit between the Excelsior and the Galaxy. Originally, we were supposed to believe that the Galaxy was the replacement for the Ambassador, which was the replacement for the Excelsior, which was the replacement for the Constitution.
However, that's not the case registry-wise. Instead, it appears that the Ambassador, while perhaps intended as an Excelsior replacement, never got off the ground, so to speak. Conversely, the Excelsior was so popular for some reason, that it actually exceeded the Ambassador.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
That depends on what purpose you think it's being used for. I believe that the Ambassadors were explorers through and through, and thus weren't suitable for workhorse-type duties that the Excelsiors eventually fell into. Likewise, the Excelsiors probably didn't end up as that great an exploration ship despite its size (for its era), but served great as a general-purpose starship to handle the day to day actiities of running a Federation. Better to have a million one-trick ponies than a handful of thoroughbreds, as it were.
Mark
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I've made a correctly-nacelled Curry diagram (I've been promoting the big-nacelle version from the beginning, even though no-one would listen). Unfortunately, it's for UP3, so I can't show it off. And, when I went to make the top view, I found that the side view had a few things that were a bit off, so it needs work.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
C'mon, you can give us a peek...
How come Vogon could do it with his NX-01 top view?
-MMoM Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
There. You can look at it, save it to your HDD, play w/ it, whatever. But don't post it anywhere else, or link to it, or anything like that.
Posted by Wes (Member # 212) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: 'For "correct" read "French".'
For "correct" read "used by almost all the English speaking world appart from that one country that doesn't seem to realise that it didn't actually invent the language, and that yes, "Pakie" isn't a good way to refer to people from Pakistan".
.... FYAD.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
OT: What IS actually happening in that UP3 forum? Any ideas as to when anything tangible will show up on the Internet?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Never ask that question.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Indeed. And, very nice work Tim. 8)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Whew! Finally I found the thread where I had asked for this picture. There are so many Curry-related things going on that an innocent little "Hi" never rang a bell - I kept looking for this everywhere else but.
Right. Thank you very much, TSN! That's a pretty picture of an ugly duckling. And the dimensions look very realistic.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
). I think now it's time to start. Read through the topics and I really have to say: wow. This seems to be the right place.![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
