In my canon shiplist, I've managed to compile most of the appearances of ship models which were simply re-uses (i.e. they were not re-labeled as the ships they were meant to represent in a specific episode). However, I have some questions about certain vessels I'm not sure about...
1. The runabout Gander - Was there ever a canon registry (or for that matter, an official one, since I don't seem to have any registry at all for it)?
2. When the Excelsior studio model was used for the Malinche, was it relabeled or re-regged?
3. The Santa Maria's registry (BDR-529): Was it mentioned or seen in the episode?
4. Harry's Yellowstone-class runabout in "Non Sequitor": Was there a registry # seen?
5. Finally, the 'pedia lists two Mirandas, the Nautilus and the Shir Kahr, which participated in Chin'toka. Were they actually there, or did TPTB just reuse stock footage of the Sitak & Majestic?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
1. No. It was a script mistake fixed in post.
2. Unknown, but likely. They tend to re-label physical models before composing the shot it would be used in, and since they didn't know how the ship would ultimately be positioned at the time, they would likely have labelled it properly in that eventuality. It was next (and last) seen as the USS Fredricksen, where it was relabelled.
3. Mentioned, no. Seen, not likely.
4. Not seen. The only shots of her were zipping by the screen too fast to get a registry.
5. The USS Shir Kahr was seen being blown up at the opening to the fifth act. The Natuilus was presumably one of many Mirandas in the background.
Mark
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
1. No registry. 2. Can't remember, but my feeling is not. Didn't we only see the aft end of her in one shot? 3. Don't know. Probably. Ask someone else. 4. NX-74751. I think we actually *did* either see it or hear it, but can't be positive. (EDIT: Guess not, if Mark says so...) 5. Yes, they both had the names and regs.
-MMoM
EDIT/P.S.
According to Spikey's site, the Nautilus was confirmed by Digital Muse to be one of the Mirandas with the Defiant and Hood on the moon run. The other one was the Tian An Men. The ShirKhar was also confirmed.
-MM
[ July 03, 2002, 12:59: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
1) I saw the episode not long ago, and I could swear the ship had a registry. When Ezri deactivates the engines we can see the nose section for a brief moment, before the storm carries the ship away. But I have never heard of a confirmed registry.
2) See above posts. I even seem to recall a photo of the Malinche-study model.
3) I think it was painted on the hull of the ship. Can't remember if we were able to see it, but I guess no. But if you look at this picture, you can see *something* on the front door entrance. I haven't seen the episode in ages, so I can't tell you if other shots reveal more, but... isn't that a 'B' (followed by something that looks like a 'D')? It shouldn't be a problem to check my episode tape for you.
4) Take a look at the nose section.. It may not be on top of the Okudagram, but that looks like a registry. Okuda doesn't put it on top of it for everyone to see, but clever as he is he hides it on the schematic nontheless.
You can even make out the Shir'Kahr's registry on the rollbar when they blow it up. One thing I still don't get: who told someone that there are the Hood and Tian An Men? They even said that they accidentially confused Hood's and Lakota's registry so that the Hood bears the wrong number. But why all this? Why no they-don't-need-names business any longer? Shir'Kahr and Nautilus are nice, but if I remember correctly Tian An Men was lost in the 'In the cards'. To put it straight: Is the info reliable?
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Forgot one thing: Which one is 'more accepted': Raman's registry from the Encyclopedia (I think it something with 56xxx) or the one from the Okudagram (29xxx)?
[ July 03, 2002, 14:42: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
3.) BDR-529 is a hommage to "Blues Brothers" IIRC. Since it would be quite unnecessary to invent an hommage-registry just for the Encyclopedia, I think it was somewhere in the episode.
quote:To put it straight: Is the info reliable?
I think the info is reliable. It was posted by David Stipes in a newsgroup and he got it from John Gross and Karen Sickles of Digitial Muse.
Here's Stipes' original post:
quote:> To all who have asked for ship names and registery numbers for "Tears of > the Prophets" > > These were kindly provided by John Gross and Karen Sickles of Digital > Muse, the company that did the CGI work. > > > Here's the ships we named in "Tears of the Prophets" > > > > The Excelsior (flyby) is the Valley Forge NCC-43305 > > The D class (taking hits from the OWP) is the Galaxy NCC-70637 > > The Miranda that gets hit by the OWP later is the ShirKahr NCC-31905 > > The other D class (doesn't take major hits) is the Venture NCC-71854 > > The Excelsior in the escort (run on the moon) is the Hood NCC-42768 > > The two Miranda in the escort (run on the moon) are the Nautilus > > NCC-31910 > > and the Tian An Men NCC-21382 but I don't think you can ever see > > their names
quote:remember correctly Tian An Men was lost in the 'In the cards'
Lost doesn't mean destroyed. Maybe their communications systems were destroyed during a battle with the Dominion and Starfleet assumed that it was destroyed, because it didn't respond.
quote:Forgot one thing: Whcih one is 'more accepted': Fleming's registry from the Encaclopedia (I think it something with 56xxx) or the one from the Okudagram (29xxx)?
I go with 29487 for the Raman.
[ July 03, 2002, 14:21: Message edited by: Spike ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Thanks for the info.
quote:Originally posted by Spike: I go with 29487 for the Raman.
Didn't I say that? Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: Lost doesn't mean destroyed. Maybe their communications systems were destroyed during a battle with the Dominion and Starfleet assumed that it was destroyed, because it didn't respond.
Wouldn't be the first time they're used a ship that is supposed to have been lost already. You may recall that the Tripoli appeared in the "MIA / WIA / KIA" list after being mothballed at Z-15 and stolen. Presumably the ship was "reaquired" somehow and later refitted to serve in the war.
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
And don't forget the Sarajevo.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: Why no they-don't-need-names business any longer?
Digital Muse always put names/regs on stuff IIRC. It was bloody FOUNDATION that would never do it. Bastards.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-MMoM
P.S.
Oh, and the more-accepted number for the Raman is 29487, rather than 59983, since we have a source for the former and not for the latter.
-MM Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Perhaps NCC-59983 is actually the USS Ramen, transporting quadronoodlecale to the colonists on Stirfry IV ("The Wok Planet!").
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Santa Maria: I checked it. You see my above post? My 'identification' was wrong. What you see is the front entrance. There's a red strip running around the body of the ship (you can see that on the picture). In front of the door, above the stripe, you can see the regisrty and name. In one scene you can clearly see the 'BDR-', the number is unreadable. Flowers and other plants are hanging over the number. Below the large registry, there's also the name, written in smaller letters. Hey, Sisko even mentiones the Erehwon-class designation in dialogue. Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Well, everything in that pic is so blurred, I can't make anything out. Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Doesn't it look wonderful? Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Again, I still can't ID it because of the blurred pic. Unless one knows where it is, one will easily miss it. I'll take your word that it's there and that you can make parts of the lettering.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
If you have the episode, there's one scene where you can see it. When Alixus and Sisko leave the wreck after they visited the ill colonist, they go from the door entrance to the landing leg. In the background, just when they leave the ship, the light grey letters and even parts of the name are visible. I searched the net for better pictures, but there are none.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
i think its safe to assume that if Okuda included the number in the Encyc, it probably matches the one that was on the physical set hull. (or at least is a dyslexic rearrangement of it, judging by some of the other Encyc numbers)
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
I think it's possible to come up with a conjectural design for the Erehwon-class based on that pic.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
The problem is the nose. 'The Making of Deep Space Nine' had some conceptual drawings of the vessel, I'm sure you've seen them. The body is identical, but the nose section looks different on each image. I'm not sure why they draw those, maybe they just wanted to have some sort of orientation, but from those images, you can't create the entire vessel.
[ July 04, 2002, 17:07: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
as for why they exist, probably the drawings were done as preparation for the possibility of building a physical model or possibly a landscape matte painting.. i actually find the incomplete view of the ship satisfying, and more convincing of its scale than if they'd tried some visual foolery to add in more of it.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Is it Erewon or Erewhon? The Encyclopedia gives the former, what does the Making of DS9 say?
Just wondering...
-MMoM Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
AFAIR the class-name was another in-joke, wasn't it? Nowhere spelt backwards -> Erehwon.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Not an in-joke as much as an allusion to the work of Samuel Butler.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Hey guys, thanks again for all the info.
1. Mark, what did you mean by "No. It was a script mistake fixed in post"?
2. I assumed that the Excelsior model was relabeled Malinche because it was new footage of the model, not stock. However, I don't recall ever seeing the ship well enough to determine if it was really relabeled. Therefore, until & unless there's new info to the contrary, I'll list the Malinche without a canon registry for now.
3. I agree that Okuda wouln't have just made up this reference without using it in the episode in some way. Although I can't see anything in Kyle Amasov's pic, I'll take his word for it that there was a registry of some kind visible.
4. Although the runabout display does show an (illegible) registry on the nose, it at least conflicts with the Yellowstone's registry with the NX versus NCC.
5. Got all the info for these ships, & added them to the canon list (plus an added bonus with the Tian An Men, wasn't expecting that one!)
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I suspect that Mark was referring to the fact that the script for "Penumbra" called the runabout the Ganges. After they realized that the Ganges had been destroyed in "Armageddon Game", they changed it to "Gander" in post-production.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Was it changed in post or at the last possible minute before filming? I remember when Frank was on a crusade to convince us it was "Gandah" we listened carefully to both Dax and Sisko's lines and nobody raised the notion that the words were looped, which one assumes would be noticeable if you were looking at it specifically.
But yeah. From a holy river in India to the longest river on the island of Newfoundland. A bit of a step down for the poor runabout. It's life was mercifully short, thankfully.
[ July 08, 2002, 17:44: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I don't actually know when it was changed. I was just going by what Mark said.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Did anyone check the script for this one? The shooting script probably comes with the proper Gander, but maybe we're lucky this time.
[EDIT]
quote: I suspect that Mark was referring to the fact that the script for "Penumbra" called the runabout the Ganges. After they realized that the Ganges had been destroyed in "Armageddon Game", they changed it to "Gander" in post-production.
Maybe I should it make a bit clearer: the Ganges is a well known rumor, but was this a statement based on facts ('I read the script and it says Ganges') or just a guess ('You know, there's this rumor that the script says Ganges instead of Gander')?
[ July 09, 2002, 10:02: Message edited by: Cpt. Kyle Amasov ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
The version of the script ("FINAL DRAFT", "January 4, 1999") included on the DS9 Companion CD says "Ganges".
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Hmm...
Why didn't they just bring back the Ganges (her successor)? I think no one would have had a problem with that.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: I think no one would have had a problem with that.
Well, they did. Hence, they changed it.
I for one am glad. Runabouts should not be resurrrected.
-MMoM Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
I don't see why not, it's just a name. Another thing to consider is that given the normally short life span of most runabouts, your going to have to start recycling names sooner or later.
Posted by o2 (Member # 907) on :
I wonder if anybody has identified the Miranda Class USS Nautilus on the DVDs?
When the Defiant, the Excelsior and the two Mirandas are flying over that asteriod at the end of the episode (but before the plattforms fire on it), you CAN bearly see the reg of one of the Miranda.
Has anybody a screen cap?
Would by nice!
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Look! It's the incredible zombie thread!
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Wow - three years and almost five months! Is that a record?
Mark
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Hardly--I think last year over in the Officer's Lounge they resurrected a thread from 1999.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Wow, I was the one who started this thread back in '02...and I'm not even alive anymore.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You never were.
...but your knowledge and experiences have been downloaded into a retarded copy of your body, just in case.
Posted by o2 (Member # 907) on :
I forgot to add the name of the episode: Tears of the Prophets.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)