Hey, this months Star Trek Magazine gave a facelift to its starship briefing, allowing Rick Sternbach to write a TNG TM style paragraph about the construction of Voyager (kind of like if there was a VGR TM.. hm...)..
Anywho, he says a lot of interesting things in the article.
Intrepid-class project begins: July 2361, originally called 'Planform SV-65'
Voyager speed limitations: Standard Cruising Speed: Warp 7.75 for 16 days Maximum Cruising Speed: Warp 9.25 for 2.25 days Emergency Dash Speed: Warp 9.975 for 12.65 hours Maximum achieved: Warp 9.986 during shakedown cruise
Second warp core contained in secondary hull for construction in one weeks time
Warp reactant mixture continuum safe: a 'fortunate by-product' of new design..
Official crew capacity: 168
Design finalized: 2367, after two intermediate designs (perhaps called 'Intrepid pathfinders' BTW, the proto-Intrepid model resembles neither of the two alternate designs shown)
Voyager first ship finished, warp core installation in 2370, launched 2371.
The Intrepid was finished three months earlier the SD 47834.6, in 2370 (possibly in time to be "Force of Nature"'s Intrepid!).
Aeroshuttle: Not finished by launch (to quote "Final outfitting of mission specific hardware was delayed.. [pending] flight testing with the U.S.S. Intrepid").
Escape Pods: 16 month lifeboat, range of .25 LY with impulse jet, fit six crew aboard.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Oooo...so exciting. Now we have things to call "canon." Can you scan some pics of this "proto-Intrepid?"
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
*scanner broken!* need USB help.. damn this blasted piece of grozit!
Well the first one has an almost circular saucer, attached to a fatter Intrepid stardrive, with no hinges. The second one has an agular five sides saucer, like the proto-Voy except with a blunt front and a fatter stardrive with hinges.
Im really mad at my scanner i accidentally plugged it back in before installing the software and it wont recognize it now. :-(
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I was talking to Tim about this the other day, speculating on whether or not this sort of thing should occupy the same sort of "semi-canon" state as the "real" technical manuals.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I'm thinking this IS the VGR tech manual.. not having gotten any interest from Pocket, Sternie's probably taking what he had already written and cashing it in by getting it published.
So I think that, since it was written by him as a companion for the TNG TM, we should consider on the same level of canon we approach that. (which differes from one of us to the other).
BTW, the article carries the same warning that was in the TNG tech manual:
"[This] ...data may be altered by Starfleet Intelligence in order to confound and confuse agents of threat forces within and without the United Federation of Planets."
Basically: If they cocked up on something, its because these are propoganda designed to scare the Cardassians, and thats why it was a planned inaccuracy. (The same paragraph was used to dismiss Franz Joseph's discontiuities in the opening to the TNG TM).
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
That's the kinda funny thing of it all. The semicanon concept as I see has to do with "if it'd come up we can be pretty sure it'd be said as follows." But when you get into people leaving shows and coming into shows and shows ending it gets a little weird.
For instance, Jeri Taylor's two books apparently nail down some stuff regarding Janeway's early career and the like, and we can be fairly certain that if the opportunity had come up for her to do throwaway lines based on what she established in the book she would have. Except in the year or so she was still executive producer following their publication, she never did (although the point could be made that the way she wrote the character to react to certain situations was based on how she wrote the character in her books.) But could we have that same kind of expectation of Mosaic/Pathways stuff showing up during Voyager's Seventh Season, when she was essentially out of the throwaway-line-inserting business? It's kinda convoluted. "Legends of the Ferengi" by Behr and Wolfe falls into this category, too, although there is plenty of stuff in there that ended up being canonized onscreen (Marauder Mo action figures, Slug-o Cola) in the years following its publication. And I have a hunch that the Jacquemettons read it before doing "Acquisition" on ENT, which means that figuratively speaking its possible for thoughts from beyond the grave to influence current Trek.
Basically, my take is this. If the information on the Intrepid portrayed above was Rick's impression of it for a considerable period of time and that there's a good chance that on any given day in say the fourth season of Voyager that if the writers had come to him asking him for advice it would resemble the above (whew, a lot of thats) then it deserves to be as semicanonical as the tech manuals. That said, by default a book on the shelf in the office is more likely to be consulted than a back-issue of a magazine by any future Trek writer and so realistically speaking the odds of any future 24th century show corroborating the stuff in there is pretty slim.
Posted by DoughBoy (Member # 804) on :
Hmmm looks like I gotta go buy me a magazine! Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
Official crew of 168. . . it'd be interesting to look at the Roll Call site again with that number as Voyager's official crew capapcity.
And when I read the idea that the escape pods can sustain life for that length of time, it makes me think of all the times (well, one or two of them) when they'd gleefully pile into the pods despite being in the middle of nowhere. . .
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Ugh. Would *you* want to share a space smaller than your bedroom with five other people for sixteen months?
Scaaaaaaaannnns. Pleeeeeeeeeeaaaassse.
Mark
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
If someone sends me the magazine, I could scan them. Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
If I *had* the magazine, I'd scan it myself with my fully-functional scanner. But nooooo, I'm out here in the Canadian sticks where magazines don't arrive until weeks after the street date.
Mark
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
They really arent all that impressive.. theyre on the order of the TNG TM Nova-class sketches
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
We don't even GET the Star Trek Mag in Australia - only that STUPID Fact Files - which I stopped after issue 3 or something. It was SOOOOOOOOOO crap...
e.g. arrow - with text "this is the bridge, this is where the Captain can be found most of the time" - or something along those lines - completely rediculous.
I heard they were still going and up to like no. 250 or something... that's like $2000+
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
The article, also, mentions the U.S.S. Hauck. You can add another ship to your shiplists. The article says that the Intrepid, Voyager, and Bellerophon are the first three vessels to be constructed. Maybe it is the Bellerophon in the construction yard in Relativity.
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
No I am fairly certain that the name on the ship in Relativity was Voyager. What's the problem with that ship not being Voyager? So what if it was officially launched elsewhere [Defiant, E-B].
As for the Hauck, hopefully it's an entirely new class of ship Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: If I *had* the magazine, I'd scan it myself with my fully-functional scanner. But nooooo, I'm out here in the Canadian sticks where magazines don't arrive until weeks after the street date.
Mark
Have you check Chapters/Indiglo?
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
I wonder if they will be doing this for every ship? It would be nice to see something on the Ambassador class, Excelsior class, Akira class, and the Sovereign class.
I would consider it semi-cannon until something on screen proves it wrong.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Maybe, but I agree that this is probably Sternbach's way of getting as close to a Voyager Tech Manual as he can, since a real tech manual seems unrealistic.
And I doubt that any of it will be contradicted on screen, as Voyager ended about a year ago.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Dave: There's no such thing as Indiglo out here. And I was in the local Chapters yesterday - no dice. Trust me, we won't be seeing the next STM issue for a couple weeks.
Matrix: God, I hope so. Then Sternbach can clear up the Akira mess once and for all, and then disappoint us with the Ambassador mess, which Bernd and co. had essentially put to rest ages back.
Mark
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
The Hauk's presumably named after this gentleman. And David meant Indigo, of which I know of at least one in Alberta (Southcentre in Calgary), so they're not an East-only thing.
[ April 09, 2002, 14:06: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Right, right. Well, there isn't one out west where I live, so...
Mark
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
There's apparently one to be found at Signal Hill. So .
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Bah! That's way down south, where no respectable Calgarian dare tread. So.
Mark
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
All I have in the city closest me is 3 Coles stores. The closest Chapters is about an hour away... Don't think there's any Indigo stores in the Atlantic provinces.
[ April 09, 2002, 16:44: Message edited by: Topher ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Is USS Hauck the fourth Intrepid? Or what? Or not? I'll most definitely add it to my list, but does he give some more insight on the ship?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
"A 15-day series of impulse tests, which verified the integrity of the vessel and systems operation at sublight velocities, culminated in Voyager accelereating to warp 1.03 with the U.S.S. Hauck flying formations for engineering support and emergency backup"
Seems like it was a pre-existing ship detailed to Starfleet engineering as support during the new ship's shakedown tests.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
No, it's not an Intrepid. It's a ship that flew alongside Voyager on her test flight, to provide engineering support. Nothing else about it was mentioned.
-MMoM Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Engineering support. Hmm. I remember an old 'making of'-magazine back when Voyager started airing. And they did also provide some technical information. I think they mentioned Voyager was in fact the third vessel in service. If this doesn't contradict Sternbach's little report, we could say Hauck was the second ship. What's better for support than your own sister ship? They could compare data and check the information collected by Voyager directly instead of using records of other test flights. Just a suggestion... Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
This could be a long shot. Could it be a Yeager Class ship or an Elkins-Type. These two ships are the closest type to the Intrepids and if you go with the registries, possibly older.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Um.. Sternbachs report said that the first three were the Intrepid, Voyager and Bellerephon.
Stop imagining things... the Hauck was a non-Intrepid ship, class unknown.. get over it
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
What was the Belerephon's registry?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
NCC-74705.
Posted by Identity Crisis (Member # 67) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: I remember an old 'making of'-magazine back when Voyager started airing. And they did also provide some technical information. I think they mentioned Voyager was in fact the third vessel in service.
Nope, the pre-publicity material said that Voyager was the second out of an initial batch of four.
(The comics later said that 3 and 4 were the USS Stargazer and the USS Pathfinder. But that's by the by.)
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
Where did the names of Fiscus and James T. Kirk come from in for #3 and #4. I read them somewhere but cannot remember where.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
somewhere very noncanon
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
Yeah well. I always like those two names for the Intrepid Class. Bellerophon has stuck on me pretty well.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
The comics showed that the Pathfinder was destroyed just before the outbreak of the Dominion War in the Gamma Quadrant, and that the Stargazer's reg was NCC-2893-A (why do they keep doing that!?).. I used to command the Stargazer-A in a sim group and stargazer2893a was my first email address
I dislike 'full name' starships, so I'm not sure U.S.S. James T. Kirk is to my liking.. and whats a 'Fiscus' (oh, google will help)...
Besides, everyone knows Kirk is still alive...
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
the USS Kirk does not cut it for me. the USS James T. Kirk does especially for a ship designed as Sternbach puts it "Troubleshooter" or Troublemaker on how you see Kirk and Voyager.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
*yuck*
wheres this from again?
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
Nevermind that last post about troubleshooter, I read that quote wrong. Also, I did a Google search on Fiscus. The name mostly deals with various identities in the Belgian government.
[ April 10, 2002, 10:54: Message edited by: CaptAlabin ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
^^^^
To me, it sounds like a plant. I have to ask my mother, she probably knows the fiscus if there is a plant of that name. Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
That would be a Ficus.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Maybe Hauck was the NCC-71325. (That was the registry of the shuttle in Caretaker). They could have transferred some shuttles to Voyager to complete it's stock; since the Wing wasn't ready at that time, too, they could have pressed the ship into service whithout completely finishing it to find the Maquis ship, maybe with a possible return to UP in their minds after the job was done to finish the work.
[Edit]: I mentioned the shuttle at the TrekBBS, maybe Rick remembers it and can tell us where the shuttle with that registry comes from. Or someone else.
[ April 10, 2002, 11:36: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Could be.. The Hauckcould be a Grin'ki-class tender detailed to the SCE at UP, registry number NCC-4903.
Who knows?!
Who cares!?
It's a ship, class unknown, registry unknown, that's NOT Intrepid-class. That's all we know.
Sternbach didnt label the shuttle.. probably some guys in graphics or art dept.s did it.
[ April 10, 2002, 11:37: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
He was the illustrator of the show, and I doubt there has been much that he didn't see. But let's wait and see.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
"Fiscus" is Dutch (and German) for the tax ehhh.. the government department dealing with the taxes.. whatever you call that in English...
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Would that make it a stablemate of the USS Internal Revenue Service and the USS Canadian Customs & Revenue Agency?
Posted by Yakaspat The Trekker (Member # 355) on :
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: Would that make it a stablemate of the USS Internal Revenue Service and the USS Canadian Customs & Revenue Agency?
LOL
;-)
That alone was worth stopping by this thread for!
-Lance
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
But why stop there? Why not have a USS Republican Party, USS Metropolitan Transit Authority, or a USS City of New Orleans? Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Don't forget the greatest of them all, the USS Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms!
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
And the ever-necessary USS Office of Protocols Involving Foreign Dignitairies, Authorized Representatives, and Heads-Of-State.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Stop it! You're listing names of ships that belong in the Andromeda universe!
Mark
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
USS I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Woman.
[ April 10, 2002, 18:58: Message edited by: Veers ]
Posted by Siegfried (Member # 29) on :
I have a feeling that this is just going to become a thread of silly ship names. Since this is below me, I'll be leaving... aboard the USS Enron Corporation. Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shik: And the ever-necessary USS Office of Protocols Involving Foreign Dignitairies, Authorized Representatives, and Heads-Of-State.
And how do you want to fit this on the ship's saucer? (I can already see the ship - an Intrepid with the name starting at the shuttlebay, running up the neck, across the saucer and back to the shuttlebay.) Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
Dr. Fiscus -- Howie Mandel's character on "St. Elsewhere."
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Does that really deserve a ship named after it...?
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Nope, so let's just leave the other names of the Intrepid Class unknown until further notice.
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Has anyone yet speculated on the meaning of 'Planform SV-65'??
Planform one supposes refers to this being a plan for a form of ship. 'SV' could stand for 'Space vehicle', or 'vessel', perhaps. Then 65 could mean that this is the 65th such starship class to be designed.
One problem though, 65 is way, way too low. But it's a working theory.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
65 different classes from the beginning to Intrepid? Looking at the current status, there seem to be 65 different starship classes in service during the mid-24th century!
Was it the perhaps just name of the project? It could mean the ship was assembled at UP-yard 65, for example. Or there have been 64 designs submitted by the ASDB. but finally Command choose number 65.
Posted by OnToMars (Member # 621) on :
Planform is an aerospace term meaning the area of the wing. I'm not sure of any other definitions, though I would bet it was meant to relate to that in some way.
If we believe that a ship's warp field is based around the shape of the hull itself (as we all should), then the planform could refer to the area of the hull itself or at least that portion off which the field is projected.
In such a case, the SV could refer to the type of planform, or essentially, the type of hull. The Intrepid-class could be the 65th design of that particular type of ship.
Now type is up to anyone's guess. Could be scout, fast warp courier, capital ship, long range explorer, etc.
I'll try to dig out my AE 101 airplane project from last semester to see if I can get recollect some more details.
[ April 11, 2002, 12:31: Message edited by: OnToMars ]
Posted by Boris (Member # 713) on :
There are less than 65 canon/official classes that predate the Intrepid (I count about 50). A lot of these have unusually long lifespans, likely longer than what we'd thought so far (Enterprise establishes that one type of Klingon battlecruiser can last 225 years, so why not a Starfleet ship?).
It is very likely that the Oberths and Mirandas served as non-"starship class" ships even in the late 22nd century (the Grissom has the registry NCC-638), and that the smooth TOS design is not necessarily older, but more of a design variant (as evidenced by the similarity of NX-01 to the Excelsior/refit Constitution).
Boris
[ April 11, 2002, 14:20: Message edited by: Boris ]
Posted by J (Member # 608) on :
Planform-65, to me means the 65th planned starship form of 2361. Any modification based on this would come 65A-Z. Of course this gets confusing when 2362's 65 comes around, oh well...
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Maybe the SV-65 in 'Planform SV-65' means Study Vehicle 65, where it is the 65th study vehicle for the Intrepid Class.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Maybe its just a random letter number combination Sternbach pulled off the top of his head
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Planform 9... from Outer Space ;o)
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
SV-65 could mean alot though I will tend to agree it is Study/Ship Vehicle/Vessel Number 65. I find the number 65 right since we around 40 to 50 classes that are before the Intrepid. The additional ships could be failed designs, smaller less important ships, prototypes, and so on. To me, if they ever continue this way, it'll be a nice way of figuring out the ages of each class (if they get it right, seeing if they keep doing it, they might put the number for the Daedalus class SV 567)
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Just to throw in some more wood into the fire...
From my shiplist, I've counted 81 starship classes total, 59 of which were seen on-screen, 15 being conjectural, and 7 possible but unseen designs. And before anyone asks, the 7 PBU designs are:
Apollo (from Emissary unused footage) Federation (From ST:TMP) Zandura (Wreckage in ST:FC?) Excelsior study model most resembling the NCC-2000 (TPTB say it's in BoBW, but I haven't found it yet) The last three DS9 TM kitbashes.
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Just to throw in some more wood into the fire...
From my shiplist, I've counted 81 starship classes total, 59 of which were seen on-screen, 15 being conjectural, and 7 possible but unseen designs. And before anyone asks, the 7 PBU designs are:
Apollo (from Emissary unused footage) Federation (From ST:TMP) Zandura (Wreckage in ST:FC?) Excelsior study model most resembling the NCC-2000 (TPTB say it's in BoBW, but I haven't found it yet) The last three DS9 TM kitbashes.
Well that's the possible but unseen designs covered, what about the 59 of which were seen on-screen and 15 conjectural. I'd be interested to know what they all are and look like.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Also, some classes such as the Daedalus class and possibily the Connie class might not follow the SV-xx format.
Also I strongly believe that the ships showed the Encyclopedia are either the kitbashes shown or small craft like the Danube or Oberths. They have to be really small in order for us not to see them, or even not be in any type of battle. Like transports, or cargo carriers.
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
Or perhaps the fleet is just so damn big that we only a sliver of it. It is just coincedence that 80% of this sliver is made up of Excelsiors.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dukhat: Just to throw in some more wood into the fire...
From my shiplist, I've counted 81 starship classes total, 59 of which were seen on-screen, 15 being conjectural, and 7 possible but unseen designs. And before anyone asks, the 7 PBU designs are:
Apollo (from Emissary unused footage) Federation (From ST:TMP) Zandura (Wreckage in ST:FC?) Excelsior study model most resembling the NCC-2000 (TPTB say it's in BoBW, but I haven't found it yet) The last three DS9 TM kitbashes.
What about the Hermes/Saladin class (I can't remember which) that was mentioned in TMP?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
[from the May 2002 issue of Star Trek: The Magazine, pp. 49-53]
BTW, the article says Voyager was the THIRD in the series built. WTF? I thought it had always been the second. (And this would make sense, considering the Bellerophon's reg is NCC-74705... ) Ah well...
-MMoM
[ March 29, 2003, 07:01 PM: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Thanks for the scans, man!
Nice ships those design concepts. OK, the first concept is nice, the second concept is ugly. Maybe I'll doa 'what if'-series based on the design concepts published here, in the TNG and DS9TMs. We never got sideviews of those ships. And remind me to finish the Norway after sunday. Until then, I have so much things to do I really don't know where to start.
Besides, what's your favourite from the TNGTM? While I think the ship with the nacelles in the front and some modules attached to the back would make an excellent TNG-freighter, My favourite is the ship with the long phylons (the ship with the squashed saucer just looks ugly, and the ship with the triangular saucer or whatever it is looks like the second concept from Sternbachs article, don't you think?)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Just looking at the pics now - oh WHY don't we get the ST:MAG in Australia!?!
Just reguarding the TNG-TM ships... apart - probably from the 'nacelles up front' ship - does anyone else see inklings of the Voyager and the Sovereign in those other ships!?! I think that is nice. I.e. the pointy Bussards are one area I can remember off hand.
The 'squashed' saucer - could be applied to the Intrepid and Sovereign - except they realised turning it 90 degrees worked better! Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
It is interesting to see that a cetacen group helped analyze the third design. Go George and Gracie's descendents.
Posted by Treknophyle (Member # 509) on :
That really Burns me up.
Seriously, not a bad article.
Someone needs to establish a 'canon scale' - 0-100%, based on who wrote an article, and judged by persons well-knowledgable in this field. Bernd? Shik?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Thanks Mim! Anyone wanna turn those pics into a PDF for easier downloading and viewing?
As for the canon scale, I'm afraid it'd be next to useless. If years of debates here have proven one thing, it's that fans will believe in what's most convenient TO THEM, rather than some arbitrary scale that some other biased fan would impose on them. While there are trends which will remain regardless of this (for example, that Sternbach's stuff will tend to be more credible than Alex Jaeger's or the average fan's when it comes to Voyager), the body of tech knowledge will forever remain a big vat of amorphous goo that individual fans will reshape to what they think it will be.
Mark
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
quote:Anyone wanna turn those pics into a PDF for easier downloading and viewing?
Actually, I can arrange for a hardcopy version to be delivered to your hands.. just buy the magazine. I realize we skirt copyright laws just a little here, but reproducing an entire magazine that is still on the stands and disseminating it freely is getting a little extreme. I'm sorry if i started it by printing my breakdown (i thought the tech was the most important thing), but it really seems to me like you guys are taking this to extremes....
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
While cleaning up my room, I found something very interesting. Several years ago (back in the dark ages when we didn't have internet, DSL for episode downloads and Drexy's e-mail address ) there was a Making Of-magazine published in germany. Wise as I am, I bought it. Besides a episode guide, there were many infos given about the ship itself. I assume they were from the bible, for example the technical data. I checked it and they say Voyager was the second ship to be launched, of a total of four ships. They also had some cool design sketches, I scanned two of them for you guys. Just thought it might be worth a post on this topic; enjoy.
(They said there are more in the Art of Star Trek, which is true, but those are not included. These were the only clear ship images in the magazine, but if you want more other stuff, just shout and I'll be here.) Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
I remember an article in a TV magazine, which showed an early design. It had a triangular saucer and big "fins".
[ April 17, 2002, 10:52: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The fins were supposed to be some new-fangled shield system - I believe Sternbach once told us that they were active absorbers of incoming beam fire, which would *bend* towards and be absorbed by the fins rather than hit the regular shields. One ST:M had all those sketches and more.
And Mike, you're right. If the magazine ever shows up here, I'll probably purchase it anyway...
Mark
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:One ST:M had all those sketches and more
Yeah I've seen those sketches but the one from the TV magazine was a little bit different. The nacelles were movably.
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
"Dilithium-lined swirl chamber"....I like the sound of that. It answers the one question I had: where the fuck was the DCAF??
Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
I wonder if the gravity plating on the Intrepids resemble in any way the gravity plating mentioned in Enterprise.
Oh god, I hope not.
And personally, having thousands of mini-gravity generators seems a bit excessive. Sure the bigger ones can be taken out more easily, but they're also a lot easier to maintain and doesn't require such a complex network of generators and plasma conduits.
Come on, someone had to complain about something.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote: They also had some cool design sketches, I scanned two of them for you guys. Just thought it might be worth a post on this topic; enjoy.
So Jim Martin did Voyager sketches TOO!?! Or were these for the Defiant and they just thought it was for Voyager?
I like the top one!
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
^^^^
According to the articles, he also design some very cool Voyager bridges. Two or three are pictured, too.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
If you read the article, you'd realize that its a fairly basic history of the Intrepid class. For instance they never explained in detail why they changed the design of the two sketches to the one that looks like it now. Also I wonder if we can incoporate the real study model into the history as well.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Not as a physical contruct, I'd say... The article says they had three submitted revisions, all of shich were pictured. The study model could be one of the seven unfinished concept designs before the first dry run.
Mark
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: Actually, I can arrange for a hardcopy version to be delivered to your hands.. just buy the magazine. I realize we skirt copyright laws just a little here, but reproducing an entire magazine that is still on the stands and disseminating it freely is getting a little extreme. I'm sorry if i started it by printing my breakdown (i thought the tech was the most important thing), but it really seems to me like you guys are taking this to extremes....
It shoudn't really be as much of a problem as you make it sound. Nobody's trying to sell it, or pass it off as their own work, or as anything besides what it is. We're not making money off it in any way...
Besides, from what I'm hearing, a lot of folks here don't even have the opportunity to buy it where they live at all.
-MMoM Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Mim.. If you spent time and money publishing a magazine, you'd be pretty steamed if, instead of a dozen people buying it, only one bought it and scanned it for all his friends. I realize that it will be off the stands soon, and scans from it will be circulated ad nauseum on Trek-related webspace, but reproducing the ENTIRE article just for people to avoid having to slap their money down on the counter IS THE EXACT REASON we have copyright laws. I could understand scanning one or two of the photos and passing them around, and excerpting the text, as these dont give the same experience as actually buying the magazine, so its not removing sales from the market. But then again, I dont understand the exact reason we need to sit here and jerk off because Sternbach said 'SV-65' and, like, wow, we're all so excited that we need to spend seven pages analyzing his choice of letters and numbers in his technobabble...
So dont give me the stupid-ass fucking eye rolling smiley.
[ April 18, 2002, 22:09: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Posted by CaptAlabin (Member # 733) on :
Is Captain Mike on his comma? Anyways, I was kind of hoping that the Pre-Intrepid Voyager was in the design process.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Now calm down everyone! I would personally love to buy the magazine, unfortunately I don't know where to get it here in Germany - Bernd (who else around here is from "this deck of the woods"?), do you?
(Oh and by the way, I am one of those few idiots that still buy each and every issue of the Fact Files - they're up to issue 219 here. )
Oh and another thought about the SV-65, perhaps it's an inside joke: anyone care to check the name of the US aircraft carrier with the rego CVN-65...? Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Austin...that's what I've been thinking Wasn't the Enterprise CV-65 before it became nuclear powered?
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: Austin...that's what I've been thinking Wasn't the Enterprise CV-65 before it became nuclear powered?
No; it was built as a nuclear powered vessel; the first aircraft carrier to have a nuclear reactor and the second ship ever, after the USS Long Beach.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Wouldn't Enterprise be the second nuclear-powered surface ship as the Nautilus was the first and the Long Beach the second (with the Long Beach as the first nuclear-powered surface ship followed by Enterprise)?
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Ah.. yes, sorry. Forgot Nautilus. Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
That is also wrong. The first nuclear powered surface ship is a Russian Ice Breaker. I don't know the name but she was the first and then the Long Beach and then the Enterprise. The first warships would be the Long Beach and the Enterprise.
The first Nuclear powered ship to be scrapped completely is the Long Beach as well. Her parts are sitting around as spares for the Enterprise sinc their tech is nearly the same.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Austin Powers: Now calm down everyone! I would personally love to buy the magazine, unfortunately I don't know where to get it here in Germany - Bernd (who else around here is from "this deck of the woods"?), do you?
There was a time when it was published here in Germany, too. But someone decided to stop printing the german version and the magazine disappeared after a few issues.
quote: (Oh and by the way, I am one of those few idiots that still buy each and every issue of the Fact Files - they're up to issue 219 here. )
Me, too. (Does anyone know if they'll include Enterprise as well? Or is it just 'post-22nd-century literature'?)
[ April 19, 2002, 14:35: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]
Posted by Masao (Member # 232) on :
The US launched a nuclear powered merchant ship, NS Savannah, in 1962.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
And this page: http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/submar/ssn571.htm says that Nautilus was launched and commissioned in 1954 (on different days). So I would still be right if Masao's info is correct.
BTW: Long Beach and Enterprise were both commissioned in 1961 (on different days).
Oh, screw it. I just reread Matrix's post. Disregard what I just wrote.
[ April 19, 2002, 21:34: Message edited by: Dat ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:Does anyone know if they'll include Enterprise as well?
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Wasn't the Enterprise CV-65 before it became nuclear powered?![[Wink]](wink.gif)
BTW, the proto-Intrepid model resembles neither of the two alternate designs shown)![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)