I've been poring over that image of Greg Jein holding the Niagara-class model, and the question I have is, what shape is the saucer? Is it circular (probably an Ambassador-class variant) or oval (probably a Galaxy-class variant)? Or, is it a custom saucer?
The saucer rim gives hints of the Galaxy-class with what appears to be a deflector/forcefield/whatever trench running the perimeter, but I'm not sure. The size when compared to the nacelles makes me think Ambassador. Is there anything visible that definitely suggests the saucer's shape?
Any ideas?
Robert
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, there's the top view from the actual episode, and it shows a nearly circular saucer. Either Greg Jein was making use of the molds of the Ambassador class, or then it's a completely customized thing, a truck hubcap, or a satellite dish...
It's not a simple "two Ambassador tops glued together", since the edge of the saucer doesn't have the characteristic Ambassador/Excelsior canting. But if could be two modified Ambassador top molds glued together.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
The bridge module (I'm working from memory here) is an Ambassador's but flipped fore to aft so that the set of vertical windows are facing forward. This would actually most likely be decks one and two, but you know what I mean...
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The Niagara is an ugly duckling. Type of ship: I'd love if we could go ahead and theorize this is a dreadnought.
[ February 07, 2002, 10:36: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: The Niagara is an ugly duckling.
I think it's purdy...
-MMoM Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
A ship only a monkey could love... Posted by Constellation of One (Member # 332) on :
Thanks, Timo. I pretty much had the same idea. Hopefully, the schematics in the upcoming Star Trek: The Magazine will answer some questions. I mean, ST:TM can't be too bad, right? Right? Um, they wouldn't just reprint the Fact Files image, would they? NOOO!!!!!!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Didn't someone say that they did?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
They did.
I think Constellation of One was being sarcastic with that post...
Posted by Constellation of One (Member # 332) on :
Yup, oh Mighty Monkey, I was.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
As for that dreadnought thing, I suppose one could define "dreadnought = three-nacelled starship". But that sounds a bit too simplistic to me - especially as there is no clear indication that one-, two- or four-nacelled ships would all be of a common type, or perform a common mission.
I'd rather say "three-nacelled starship = good configuration for a dreadnought", but then specify that there can be two-nacelled dreadnoughts as well, and three-nacelled non-dreadnoughts.
And to keep the historical analogy, I'd define a Starfleet dreadnought as "an outdated intermediate step from cruisers to battleships", and then possibly replace "battleship" with "explorer". There might not have been any dreadnoughts after the TMP-era one. And IMHO, the Niagara is the same thing as the Ambassador - both have the same sort of equipment and size.
The Ambassadors are heavy cruisers in the TNG era, but I like to think that they used to be explorers originally. When bigger, faster and more capable ships get built, the "honorary" title of explorer is given to the top-of-the-line mammoths, and the older ships in fact move to lesser duties because of this. The Niagaras could be ex-explorers, too, perhaps optimized for longer-range missions than the Ambassadors.
And like many others, I like to think that the older Niagaras with 28000-range NCCs had Ambassador engines, while the 59000 range ships are refits - the 28000 rego is just too good to be ignored as a typo.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Michael_T (Member # 144) on :
I just saw the latest ST: TM issue with Linda Park gracing the cover and it has schematics of the Niagra and Freedom class ships with limited info available. That and I saw the cover picture of the new Trek book called ST: SCE with a Sabre Class cutaway. It looks almost if not the same to the one I've seen online and recieved from one of the members here.
[ February 08, 2002, 09:37: Message edited by: Michael_T ]
Posted by pIn'a' Sov (Member # 293) on :
any beauty-shots of Niagara and Freedom-classes or just the diagrams?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Basically, any pictures of these ships you want will have to be found on Ex-Astris, where Bernd has collected screenshots, diagrams, studio model pics, and a few CGI renderings.
Other than that (which is actually quite a bit) there's zilch. But that's not surprising, considering these ships were only ever onscreen for a few brief moments in two TNG episodes...
-MMoM Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
ST: SCE?
Thats the full title of this new book?
Posted by Michael_T (Member # 144) on :
I think it's Star Trek: Starfleet Corps Of Engineers.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
So just what kind of images does The Magazine have on the Niagra and Freedom? If they went to the trouble of including these obscure ships in the first place, one would HOPE that they at least get some updated schematics...
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Why does everybody think that there'd be anything different in the Magazine from in the Fact Files? They're the same publication. Produced by the same people. The only differences are that (obviously) the issues are released on different schedules, (so one month's issue of the Mag won't necessarily cover the same ships as that month's corresponding FF issue) and the fact that the Mag additionally features behind-the-scenes and making-of articles, which the Fact Files don't.
They're not gonna bother to change the schematics...
-MMoM Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote:They're the same publication. Produced by the same people.
I wouldn't quite say that, actually. Different arms of the same Viacom beast, yes, but while the Magazine tends to reuse Fact File material I don't think they're produced from a common office.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
ah, another day, another hair split right down the middle...
Posted by Constellation of One (Member # 332) on :
I just got the magazinelate yesterdy, and the schematics are clearly incorrect, and most likely Fact File reprints. The saucer is celarly wrong, since it shows an A-B section with a main shuttlebay at the reas, and the whole structure is shaped nothing like the Ambassador section Greag Jein used. The Niagara and Freedom saucers even have incorrect phaser strip placements. With all of this clearly incorrect, I'm not at all confident that they even got the saucer shape right, or if it is correct that we would be very confident about it.
Crud.
Posted by Constellation of One (Member # 332) on :
Sorry. That should be "main shuttlebay in the rear" of the A-B deck.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)