Short of me watching every single episode of TNG/DS9 where a GCS fires a weapon to visually catalog every instance...
...does anyone have or know where I can find a CANON detailed layout of all of the weapon arrays of a Galaxy Class (and potentially other class[es]) starship[s]? Thanks! Posted by Intruder1701 (Member # 880) on :
I have the Enterprise D deck plans from the main bridge down to deck 42 does that help?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Yeah, I'd think you could get a count of weaponry for the Galaxy from just about anywhere. TNG-era phasers, for instance, aren't hard to spot. (And it seems to me that the only difference between the "canon" and something like the technical manual's layout is the saucer's torpedo launcher, which could easily be ignored, if that's what you wanted.) Basically, couldn't you just go grab some images off Google?
Unless you're thinking of the sort of list which disregards the possibility of errors, thus including things like phasers coming from where no phaser should be; and includes weird one-off things like the "antimatter spread" from Best of Both Worlds. In that case, I haven't seen such a list.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Also consider the times we've seen the Galaxy fire phasers from the torpedo launcher- possibly an error or some lone phaser emitter buried beneath the launch tube (or the time Voyager fired a phaser blast from mid nacelle-somewhow).
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Wasn't a phaser blast also seen coming from the captain's yacht once - TOS-style?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
In "Encounter at Farpoint", the Enterprise fired an "energy beam" from the captain's yacht.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah: a biiig flashlight kinda beam no less! A perfect start to the series.... Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Picad told Tasha to "rig a phaser beam" to transmit compatible energy. I'm sure it was replaced when the Yacht arrived on Tuesday...
Mark
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
And it wasn't until Thursday until it was finally installed. The yard engineers had to rewire the whole area because of Picard's order to Yar. Meanwhile Picard was cruising around in his yacht around Earth all happy because he finally has a ship again and not a desk job.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote:Originally posted by Intruder1701: I have the Enterprise D deck plans from the main bridge down to deck 42 does that help?
What is its source?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I would think that those are the Rick Sternbach deckplans. I also have a copy.
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
That would be a good start.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
ebay would be a good start for your very own copy - too Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Which makes about as much sense as telling someone to go out and buy the dvd themselves whenever a cap request is posted.
Posted by Talos (Member # 1419) on :
Looking at my copy of the blueprints, these are the phaser arrays that are visible.
Saucer: Long dorsal array long ventral array
Battle Section: medium ventral forward 2 short ventral aft 2 short ventral nacelle 2 short dorsal aft 2 short neck dorsal medium neck forward (covered by saucer)
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
The Galaxy-class starship has 12 phaser banks, 17 transporter emitters, and 2 visible and one hidden torpedo launcher.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The refit (Venture) adds two more phasers to the nacelles. The AGT "dreadnaught" adds three phaser nacelles four more phasers to the nacelle pylons (on "fin" additions) and the (frankly idiotic) "guns" and giant torpedo launcher around the bridge.
[ November 02, 2004, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Umm, this is DANGEROUSLY inaccurate.
When in attached flight mode, a Galaxy sports eleven emitters: two long ones on the saucer, two short ones atop the secondary hull (but flush with the saucer), two on the pylons, two atop the stern, two below the stern, and one below the secondary hull. The twelvth unit atop the secondary hull is "hidden" just like the saucer torpedo launcher when in attached mode. However, the twelvth phaser is there in the model "for real", whereas the saucer torpedo launcher may not have been built into the model at all.
The Venture indeed adds two nacelletop strips. The three-naceller, however, was not seen firing anything from the new greeblings next to the bridge. Indeed, devices that look like gun barrels are seldom weapons in Starfleet designs. There were new phaser strips atop all three nacelles, and there was a big beam weapon below the saucer, but the new pylons for the lower nacelles only feature two additional phaser strips, not four. There are no strips in the middle pylon.
So there.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'd certainly love to believe those are some kind of sensors or something else as well but.....
I'd have sworn there was a phaser atop the center nacelle as well....
Tere is on my own version (though mine is not the Enterprise, so anything goes). Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Yes, there is a strip atop the center nacelle - but no strips on the center *pylon*.
I'd rather have preferred the ship without the silly antennae next to the bridge. The rest of the ship was "angularized" with the ventral gun, the fin extensions and the straight-lined central pylon, plus the new impulse boxes. The by-the-bridge greeblings with their rounded bases are a move in a whole different direction, a "spiky-round" motif that is not to be found anywhere else on the ship.
Perhaps just covering the whole bridge with a new angular assembly would have worked best?
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
This is great, with exception of the fact that I can visualize very little of what I am reading.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Perhaps just covering the whole bridge with a new angular assembly would have worked best?
Probably, but then we'd have suffered another redress of the battle-bridge or Enterprise-C set for the interior. I like most of the additions though....just not as part of a refit to an existing Galaxy: imagine gutting ten decks, two of three shuttlebays and eliminating ther saucer-seperation feature to install that massive new impulse engine block.... They could've at least blended it in a bit more with the saucer.
quote:This is great, with exception of the fact that I can visualize very little of what I am reading.
When building a model of the AGT-style Galaxy, I decided to lose theGalaxy's goofy-looking (to me) "neck" and I like the result- a sleeker looking ship: http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/view?p=999&gid=1301771&uid=657989 I went with a thicker (almost Nebula-like) third nacelle pylon though (complete wuth decks windows and a docking ports).
[ November 03, 2004, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Jason Abbadon ]
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
As visually challenged as I may be, I was really speaking of the original GC, not the retaaded GC version 3.0
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I just noticed something. If you look at the dorsal scematic, on the forward part of the neck, right behind the saucer, there is something not right. The starboard phaser array is missing and the port is ill-defined. It is completely missing, even the markings that are at the end of every other array.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
Fact Files made that pic, they sucked at pretty much everything - I don't think they had a single set of schematics that didn't need fixing somehow, just compare their Niagara views with the actual model. Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by Talos: I just noticed something. If you look at the dorsal scematic, on the forward part of the neck, right behind the saucer, there is something not right. The starboard phaser array is missing and the port is ill-defined. It is completely missing, even the markings that are at the end of every other array.
...aaaaaannnnnnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddd, they didn't make Shuttlebay 3 bigger than 2. They have two small doors, just a portside 'flipped' for starboard as well, (and they still messed up on the neck phaser!)
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
So, we're agreed? Fact Files sucked hard. Worse still was the STTM reprints of those images with the new (totally senseless) descriptons. They list the Perigrine fighter as 65 meters long for example...snicker Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy: ... not the retaaded GC version 3.0
Irony!
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
It's still a retarded design, regardless of his lack of a spellchecker. It reminds me of all the stupid fanboyish crap you find on shipschematics.net.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Yeah, it's fanboyish, but isn't that the point? Having it go Warp 13, giving it a cloaking device, and equipping the ship with the Big Fuck Off Beam Weapon Of Doom...all fanboy ideas, all making for a delightfully silly moment when the show stopped taking itself seriously.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
And if you want to know every canon instance of phaser fire from a GCS, then you have...
1 billion times from the top of the saucer 1 billion times from the bottom of the saucer Once from the cobrahead of the Stardrive section. Once from the one on the bottom just behind the deflector dish. Twice from the torpedo launcher (wrong colour, as well).
(I'd also go with either "weapon arrays", or "weapons arrays".)
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Also at least once from the pylon strips (at an impossible angle, but still), in "BoBW".
Did we truly never see the aft arrays fire? Sounds weird, but I'm ready to believe that. The abilities of the ship were rather grossly underused, especially the capacity for a zillion shuttles or other really cool auxiliary craft.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
The aft phasers were used, though not seen emitting, in "The Nth Degree" against that Cytherian probe.
It's easy to forget the budgetary limitations of early TNG - back then, the very fact that a photon torpedo took up less screen space or time meant that they used them more often than phasers. A writer at a con once said that at the beginning of TNG, every torpedo special effect shot would cost $3000, while a single phaser beam would cost $5000. Result? More torpedoes, or more importantly little direct combat at all.
Of course, nowadays it's both cheaper and simpler to do it CGI. According to Mojo et. al., the CGI folks charge for a) object design time, b) VFX shot design time, and c) rendering time, often as a single package per VFX shot. This generally means that bigger shots, like a zillion shuttles, would actually be feasible. Could you imagine the how long and expensive it'd be to shoot the race in VOY "Drive", or ANY of the fleet shots in DS9, in the old model days?
Mark
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
I'd say something like 43 years on a meager $5,235,5454,634,339.66 budget.
Posted by Captain Boh (Member # 1282) on :
Well, rendering more objects takes more time, but...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: Yeah, it's fanboyish, but isn't that the point? Having it go Warp 13, giving it a cloaking device, and equipping the ship with the Big Fuck Off Beam Weapon Of Doom...all fanboy ideas, all making for a delightfully silly moment when the show stopped taking itself seriously.
That was right at season seven's start(okay, with two or three notable exceptions)
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
THE PEGASUS WUZZZ #1!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Hey, so is there any similiar profiles for the Akira and Excelsior? I have a pretty good feel for the Excelsior (the best show from the Lakota) but the Akira always seems to be talked up as some big "gunship" but what, if any exist, does the official schematics show?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Errm, I don't want to sound to harsh, but why don't you just visit Bernd's site or any of the million others that offer all the pics and views you want?
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
1) the only info on the Excelsior is an msd of the Enterprise-B which is incomplete/inaccurate on EAS;
2) there is nothing on the Akira in terms of what I am asking at EAS;
so how about you either prove me wrong or stop being so smug for actually making a legitimate inquiry. Besides, I'm not just looking for *any* pics or views, I'm asking specifics.
I'm not looking for some fanboy redition, I'm looking for something that may or may not be available from whatever official or semi-official sources that I may have missed in the numerous magizines and so forth I have not in my possession.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)