More specifically, I was watching the bonus features of the TNGS2DVD set, which includes a walk through the Paramount warehouses that contained all the no-longer-used props from all of Trek. It's amazing what they keep there, including stuff as far back as the original ST3 mushroom and the larger models of the parts of the Reliant that they blew up in ST2. Seeing as most of this stuff will likely NEVER be used again, on wonders why they bother keeping it around instead of selling it off or something. Anyway, the 3-foot Excelsior model orginally created for VOY "Flashback" was there, labeled as the Fredrickson as she showed up in DS9 "A Time to Stand".
Where am I going with this? Well, between the two episodes above there's about one year where the model is used - and as such, it must have been relabeled as the USS Malinche from DS9 "For the Uniform". There's also one or two new stock shots of DS9 with an Excelsior class ship hanging from it that showed up around this time. Given that models too small to have the decals seen are often not changed for stock shots, assuming the Excelsior in these stock shots are not CGI (which is likely at this time in the series), the Excelsior could just be labeled the Malinche. Or if I'm mistaken and the stock shot shows up afterwards, the Excelsior would therefore be labeled the Fredrickson!
So there.
Mark
[ May 10, 2002, 20:49: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, considering the vast multitude of possibilities any particular bit of Star Trek presents ("Quick, we need half of an old movie style nacelle for reference!"), I imagine it is in Paramount's best interest to keep as much stuff stored as possible.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
I thought Malinche was E-B-style, but I could be wrong.
We never saw anything labeled 'Malinche', the only shot we had was the ship floating dead in space, and you can neither see a registry nor a name. So maybe they didn't even bother to relabel it.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Malinche was old Excie style...or more precisely it was the Mark II variant (the Excelsior in ST6 as opposed to the Excelsior in ST3/ST4)
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
In other words, the 3-foot model from "Flashback". And it's true we didn't see a reg number or name (we only had one shot of her, from the aft-ventral angle). However, in physical model days they do tend to relabel stuff for the simple reason that they won't know whether or not the reg number will be seen or not until they actually shoot the model - take the lantree as an example. I'm fairly certain that they would have relabeled it...
Mark
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I just realized that 'LANTREE' may have been named such simply to avoid having to make any more letters than the ones already contained in the word 'RELIANT' of the ships original labels.. or is that a coincidence..?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Jaysus...
y'know, I can't believe than in the past decade I'd never noticed that...
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
i hadnt ever realized it until tonight, thanhks to me being mercilessly stoned... same thinkg goes for rearranging the 'VOYAGER' models labels for the 'YEAGER'.. both sets of names are rearranged letters with an added 'e'
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
wow, i never noticed that either. i'm sure that you are completely correct about that, captainmike. the question now, though, is that if they could add an "E" to the names of ships in modern times, why couldn't they have added a simple extra number to the registry of a certain constitution class ship in TOS (i'm well aware of the fact of this being beaten to death, so no flamage)?
--jacob
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
It always boils down to money. As in, in TOS they had next to none. Compared to now, anyways.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Re: Lantree, I don't think it's a case of them wanting to save model money. While it's the first appearance of the Reliant model on TNG, they'd previously done the Constellation model in full decals... I doubt that they'd had a problem with fonts then.
For the TOS Constelation, I figger they could have just as easily put 1710 and the fans could have cared less - at the time.
Mark
Posted by Boris (Member # 713) on :
Ok:
When doing research for her concordance, Bjo Trimble examined a lot of scripts and production notes. There, she found a lot of those registry numbers, including 1764, 1657 and others that weren't on the Court Martial chart. Those numbers ended up in the pre-Joseph Concordance, then in FASA's books, then in the Encyclopedia.
It is true that she hasn't confirmed that these numbers were actually *assigned* to the ship names at the time, as opposed to being merely listed somewhere. However, we know full well that the official list of "twelve like her" freely included the Republic, the Constellation, the Enterprise, and even the Valiant.
Hence, it is not at all certain that 1017 was a mistake. Another option is that people aside from Jefferies used a simple linear system by which the oldest of the Starship Class (40 years old) would have low numbers, while the most current would have higher numbers.
Boris
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
We do? Whitfield made a lot of other bonehead errors in "The Making of Star Trek", so given that his list inludes "the following names ... established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Excalibur, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid, I would like to point out that the Republic and Valiant show up nowhere in the memos being tossed back and forth, and that neither they nor Whitfield's list include the Defiant. I always advocate anyone using that book as anything other than a guide to mid-60s TV production should take whatever material they glean from it with several solar masses of sodium chloride...
--Jonah
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
As for Bjo's research -- I believe her. I just want to know which scripts and production materials. I want to see everything in context, so I can have a better idea of what was going on around these numbers that are otherwise just floating around waiting for anyone to assign any meanig to them whatsoever.
--Jonah
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Seeing as most of this stuff will likely NEVER be used again, on wonders why they bother keeping it around instead of selling it off or something.
IIRC, they used the destroyed Ent-Nil saucer from STII in "The Jem'Hadar" to simulate the destruction of the Odyssey's saucer (and of course it was also used in BoBW...).
Mark, did you happen to see the registry number on the Fredrickson's saucer?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Nope. The archivist was sorta walking by the model, and just sorta glanced at it and called it "the Fredrickson, originally labelled Excelsior from an episode of Voyager" or words to that effect.
I'm sure the model is normally crated and was taken out just for the interview, so the odds are it's NCC-42111 as we've assumed.
Mark
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I recall reading from somewhere that Penny Juday ran the archives. If that's her, then I think we can assume exactly why that particular model was shown...
[ May 12, 2002, 13:35: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The archivist is indeed Penny. What's the story here? And why hasn't she absconded with all this stuff, to become a black market memorabilia millionairess?
Mark
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
According to an interview with Ms. Juday I read a while back, plus the listening device I've planted in her fruitbowl at home, she was hooked up with Trek scenic artist Anthony Fredrickson by the Okudas. They're presently married.
The good ship Frederickson is named after you-know-who. Not to be outdone, Anthony (or possibly someone else in the Voyager Art Department) apparently snuck "Juday" onto a paper diagram of the Maquis raider that some people allege is readable in a Voyager episode.
Posted by Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
I don't think that a Constitution Class saucer section was used as the debris field from a Galaxy Class starship. Perhpas they used that instead in the DS9 episode "The Sound of Her Voice" since there seems to be a Constitution Class refit nacelle in the crash area.
Can anyone make a DVD pic of the Fredrickson in the crate?
[ May 12, 2002, 15:05: Message edited by: Vice-Admiral Michael T. Colorge ]
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
To me the Odyssey's wrecked saucer looked Galaxy to me, perhaps a plastic model? And the Lantree, I think it's just a coincidence that it appears to use letters from "Reliant". I think the script (that was obviously written first) called for a ship named Lantree, but give no specific model to use since it was only identified by dialog as a "Class whatever Supply Ship". The people just picked up the Reliant model and used it. It could have easily been the Grissom model or the Stargazer model or the Excelsior model or the refit Enterprise model if they chose fit.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)