How good is this episode - it was just on here again tonight.
I've forgotten how much I loved Beverly episodes.
Just a little thing about the Bozeman - Soyuz class - retired over 80 years ago as of 2368.
There was always confusion as to the reason behind the causality loop - that it was the Bozeman that caused it - and that they themselves dragged the Enterprise into their own causality loop. Well - the truth started out easy to follow in the episode - but the final comments by Picard towards Bateson confuse the situation by having Picard insinuate that the Bozeman has been in it's own causality loop for the past 96 years.
WRONG Picard.
Geordi clearly states in the second-last loop that the Enterprise has been drawn in by the distortion by the Space-Time continuum. That is the Bozeman was always going to come through the temporal rift into the 24th century. They were never in a causality loop.
The ENTERPRISE was in a causality loop for 17.2 days - since they were pushed into one due to the Bozeman coming through and hitting them
Correction - the Bozeman WOULD have been in a causality loop - but not for 96 years only the 17.2 days since the E-D was in one.
OH! And How come the E-D nacelle gets blown to smithereens - while the Bozeman's nacelle(s) have NO damage occuring to them!?!
Good episode.
Anyone got a grab of the Bozeman's bridge - I know it's old-ish but how old?
And I think the year was 2272 or 2273 that the Bozeman was from - what does that correspond with in the TOS movie timeframe? I around which movie?
Andrew
Posted by StyroFoam Man (Member # 706) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: OH! And How come the E-D nacelle gets blown to smithereens - while the Bozeman's nacelle(s) have NO damage occuring to them!?!
I would assume that it was because someone dropped the ball in the VFX department. I mean, they have stock footage of a Miranda nacelle getting shattered. I know they couldn't use footage from TWOK, but they did at least have a starting point.
And another thing!
WHY did the explosion of the entire ship begin at the TOP OF THE SAUCER?! All the damage occured to the engines, so the explosion that destroyed the ship should have been centered in the secondary hull! GRRRR!!
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Did it? I do recall the E-D spinning out of control - at least in the last two times. 2nd last - you see the starfield move, the last explosion - you see it from the outside.
Maybe an explosion ripped through power conduits and the SIF was weakest at the top?
Andrew
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
It's all early 1990's SFX technology for you.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
I thought I was the only one with that interpretation! I'm glad someone else sees it as i do. You're right that the entire event took place over 17.4 days. The Bozeman came through the rift (and travelled through time) instantly, but with each explosion, the Bozeman was 'reset' and travelled through the rift again.
Did you mean bridge interior or exterior? The exterior is the Phase II series bridge with the dual turbofifts in the back.
Bateson reports the year is 2278, which according to the Trek Chronology, happens after the Motion Picture (2271) but before The Wrath of Khan (2285).
Posted by The Red Admiral (Member # 602) on :
Originally, there were plans to have Saavik on the ship. She would have been standing next to Bateson on the Bozeman bridge. Of course, if they'd stuck to the 2278 timeframe, it would've caused a major continuity error (a paradox even) Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Originally also, it was supposed to be from the Enterprise-C's timeframe or thereabouts and the USS Bozeman was intended to be another class of starship with Ambassador Class design aesthetics. Apparently Rich Sternbach designed such a vessel but budgetary considerations had them opt for a simple existing model redress, so we never ended up seeing an Ambassador variant. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Was that from that show? I thought the Ambassador era ship was for another episode and that it was a TOS era vessel they were hoping for for this episode??
BTW I meant the Bridge interior - it looked as if it had quite a high sloping ceiling (which fits that different bridge module) - and the aesthetics of it looked more TOS-ish Enterprise - i.e. Red railing 'picture screens' around the bridge. Would have been nice to have seen a TOS alien on that bridge!! I guess the TWOK uniforms are more well-known - but it would have been interesting to have TMP uniforms - even though they probably wouldn't be that flattering on Kelsey Grammer - or anyone for that fact.
They could have used another TOS actor instead of Saavik - Rand - no. Umm... Riley!?! Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
IIRC, the Bozeman was supposed to be a TOS Constitution class with the TOS uniforms and bridge, but it was too expensive to rebuild the sets and the model. The Ambassador-era ship in question is probably the Pegasus from the titular episode, which was supposed to be a Cheyenne class relative.
And the bridge was just a simple redress of the Enterprise battle bridge/generic guest bridge set. Complete with LCARS-style Okudagrams, which are about a decade too early. Oh well. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Ok, I thought I read it was going to be of the connie-era not an actual CONSTITUTION class.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I also remember reading it as TOS Connie era, not an actual Connie class.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I agree with most things here, but...
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: I've forgotten how much I loved Beverly episodes.
One; it was a Beverly episode?
And two; you love Beverly episodes?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by StyroFoam Man:
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: OH! And How come the E-D nacelle gets blown to smithereens - while the Bozeman's nacelle(s) have NO damage occuring to them!?!
I would assume that it was because someone dropped the ball in the VFX department. I mean, they have stock footage of a Miranda nacelle getting shattered. I know they couldn't use footage from TWOK, but they did at least have a starting point.
And another thing!
WHY did the explosion of the entire ship begin at the TOP OF THE SAUCER?! All the damage occured to the engines, so the explosion that destroyed the ship should have been centered in the secondary hull! GRRRR!!
A better question is why the Bozeman is about 300% too large for a Miranda class variant in that shot? The Bozeman should total about 3/4 the Enterprise's nacelle length! (of course the real reason is the VFX dept using two models of differing scales in the same shot without resorting to a composite....) Look at the Miranda at the end of Generations to see the correct scale.
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: One; it was a Beverly episode?
And two; you love Beverly episodes?
Technically, it could be. She played an important role in getting the plot advanced.
And what's wrong with Beverly episodes? You didn't like "The High Ground," "Remember Me," "Ethics," "Suspicions," or "Descent"? Just my opinion, but those were all standout episodes from TNG.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Unfortunatly, DRAMATIC IMPACT wins out again over NITPICKISHLY ACCURATE. If a correctly scaled Miranda-type hit the Enterprise, it wouldn't have looked nearly as bad.
Actually, I'll be clearer. If a Miranda-variant flew straight into the Enterprise, it would look really, really cool. And it would be really, really expense. I wa impressed enough with the impact and explosion. To have the Bozeman crash into the Enterprise nacelle (or other area) and crumple properly would have involved building another model to blow up, and I think they'd already blown the budget doing a Galaxy class one.
Actually, a thought strikes me. Was it a custom built model they blew up? Or was it an AMT model? Or was it (maybe) the tiny two foot model used for distance shots in season 1 that I don't think was ever used again?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Well, they already had to film the explosion from several angles to make the story visually intresting (each time the ship blows we see another angle), so why not just destroy a modified Miranda class AMT model? .....mabye there was no time to do a more extensive shot of the two ships colliding...and we already know that the budget was tight enough to make using the Miranda a forgone conclusion. Too bad they did not have the ability to do DS9 style effects with the exploding Bozeman and Enterprise! I'd love to see the Bozeman collide with the Enterprise's saucer or deflector. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
speaking/thinking of effects - I'd love to see an effect of a Galaxy class starship ramming DS9 (accidently of course) With the saucer slicing through the docking ring and then the habitat ring... and a docking pylon being wrenched away and left floating into space!! Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Another thought about the direct hit on the Galaxy nacelle in C&E - when I watched it again last night - for the first time in quite a while the first thing I was reminded of - jolted back to was the destruction of the Odyssey!!
Was anyone totally flipped out by the destruction of the Odyssey!?! I was. I saw "The Jem'Hadar" at a convention in 1994 - and a whole hall filled with people watching an episode is one awesome experience - especially when everyone is gasping/crying/holding their breath at the end of "The Jem'Hadar" and the destruction of the Odyssey!!
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Was anyone totally flipped out by the destruction of the Odyssey!?! I was. I saw "The Jem'Hadar" at a convention in 1994 - and a whole hall filled with people watching an episode is one awesome experience - especially when everyone is gasping/crying/holding their breath at the end of "The Jem'Hadar" and the destruction of the Odyssey!!
Yep... part of the reason I refused to watch DS9 until Worf returned. Fortunately, I didn't miss much... Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
*double and typo filled post, see the correct one below*
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Funny you should mention the Odyssey, because I remember reading somewhere that they used one of the blown up AMT E-D models for the explosion and wreckage of the Odyssey. They were lucky that someone had decided to save one of those models.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
I understood that they caused explosions on a mock-up Galaxy Class for the Odyssey. I remember reading that Adam Howard, the Quantel Harry animator saw two explosions in the film: the deflector and the nacelle cap, and it was this 'happy accident' that made him decide that it would be cool to have a pice of the deflector blow out the cap. He animated the junk flying back so the effect of one explosion caused the other.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
I meant after that. The big explosion the ripped the Odyssey apart. They had composited the E-D AMT model over the Odyssey in the same angle so they could do the final explosion and have the saucer and the port nacelle in damaged condition and flying away.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Starship Millennium:
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Was anyone totally flipped out by the destruction of the Odyssey!?! I was. I saw "The Jem'Hadar" at a convention in 1994 - and a whole hall filled with people watching an episode is one awesome experience - especially when everyone is gasping/crying/holding their breath at the end of "The Jem'Hadar" and the destruction of the Odyssey!!
Yep... part of the reason I refused to watch DS9 until Worf returned. Fortunately, I didn't miss much...
No NO NO NO NO, I meant flipped out as in - overcome/overwhelmed/awe-struck/amazed/though how cool is that!/OMG! sort of stuff! Not - this is shite let me watch Earth 2.
It made me want to see Season 3... BADLY.
Plus you missed some of Trek's best in Season 3. Great stuff there (along with some crud like Fascination and Meridian).
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Couple of things I wanted to get in on this thread:
1) The Ent spins after the nacelle blows out in every run through the loop. Even when we don't see it happen, Riker is always thrown to the floor as a result of it.
2) I believe that I read somewhere a quickbuild (or several of them) was used for the exploding ship in C&E. My guess would be that they used AMT models.
3) Perhaps the Bozeman *did* sustain damage to their nacelle. After it impacts the Ent, we never see it again. Maybe the effects just weren't quite so instantaneous.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Well, they already had to film the explosion from several angles to make the story visually intresting (each time the ship blows we see another angle), so why not just destroy a modified Miranda class AMT model?
Two reasons. One, you're wrong. There were only two "explosion shots". The one seen at the beginning, where the ship spins around and then explodes, with the nacelles flying off; and another, where the ship is stationary and appears to blow out from inside. For that one, an explosion effect was laid over the model, so no bits flew off.
There's also the fact that the explosion and collision are completely different shots. The collision is the same every time, and obviously uses the studio models. In most of the sequences, we then see the Enterprise spinning, which is probably also the studio model. The only time the fake model would have been used is the flying apart explosion at the end.
The Enterprise is REALLY BIG in the frame when the Bozeman hits, and the Bozeman itself is also fairly large. I doubt they could have gotten away with using the AMT models at that close range.
Also, was the Reliant model out in 1991? I didn't think it came out until about 94.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
i doubt the miranda-reliant model was ever in any danger of being damaged.. the scene where it hits the 1701-D was almost certainly composited (accounting for the differing scales of the two models).. and then we dont actually see it touched by anything..
the biggest damage it took was having awful paste-ons placed on it (necessitating additional paste-ons in its next appearance, Emissary, to cover the spots where junk was crapped onto it.. and preventing it from being shown as an original modification Miranda..).. plus having godawful registry mistakes pasted onto it also.. which is worse, IMO..
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: .. plus having godawful registry mistakes pasted onto it also.. which is worse, IMO..
What registry mistakes are you referring to??
---- The filming models weren't shot together. The Enterprise-D used was 4ft long, the Bozeman 5ft. You can tell it's the large Miranda redressed because of the bridge section used from Phase II series, the 4-footer Nebula Class recast parts and the Stargazer miniature recast parts.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
the NCC-1940/NCC-1840 conundrum, as well as the Brittain/Brattain fiasco.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I stand corrected. ....but if the two models were not filmed togeather, then it's silly for the Bozeman to be soooo out of scale.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
Wait a second... I read in the DS9 Companion that the Galaxy Class they blew up in the Jem H'addar was one of the mock up ships blown up for either Cause and Effect or Contagion. It was definately larger than the AMT/Ertl models in 1/1400 scale.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Brittain/Brattain thing shouldn't be a conundrum. Brattain was a scientist, The ship was a science vessel. The plaque read Brattain, the label behind the captain's chair said Brattain. The only guff was the model. I dismiss that as easy as the Yamato 1305-E fiasco.
The Bozeman from every pic I've seen was labelled 1941 allaround. Bad screen caps make it look as though there's an 8 on the bottom. Anybody got a screencap of the Bozeman's underside from DVD?
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
quote:Originally posted by SoundEffect: Brittain/Brattain thing shouldn't be a conundrum. Brattain was a scientist, The ship was a science vessel. The plaque read Brattain, the label behind the captain's chair said Brattain. The only guff was the model. I dismiss that as easy as the Yamato 1305-E fiasco.
*points out that he lives on the Brittain Road*
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Even DVD caps are incapable of revealing whether the Bozeman had NCC-1941 on the saucer underside or not. I have no idea where this idea came from, but from the clearest caps it looks as much like a 9 as an 8 to me. The only thing that's for sure is that the nacelles and the top of the saucer (the latter having been seen clearly in the episode) were labeled NCC-1941.
-MMoM Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
Ack Registries!!!! I must move this thread before it is too late!!!!
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
I don't know which version of "Cause and Effect" you're seeing, but I don't remember ever seeing the top of the saucer in the ep. We saw the bottom of the saucer and the nacelles fairly close in the repeated nacelle-collision shots, though. It's been a while since I saw the ep, but I seem to recall all the registries reading 1841 except for the one on top of the saucer (which we never saw), which Jein did as 1941 as an homage to a Spielberg movie he worked on. The only place I ever saw that registry clearly was in the Encyclopedia.
--Jonah
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Spike has gently corrected me. The Bozeman is now officially giving me fits.
--Jonah
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
A while ago SoundEffect pointed out to me that NCC-1941 was visible during the episode and showed me a cap... I reexamined the scene when I did the DVD caps last month. It's visible, if only for a split second. Otherwise, it's still pretty hard to tell what the underside or nacelles say, and I'm hesitant to accept the Encyclopedia as proof since we know they've gone Photoshop crazy on pics before. I did some caps, but my harddrive crashed so I don't have them handy at the moment. Lemme see if they were stolen...
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Hey Nick! SoundEffect to the rescue. Here's a screen cap from the show:
Cool! Our first canonical proof of a meteoroid strike inflicting damage on starship hull surface features, like paint jobs...
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Somewhat more worryingly my school's blocking system comes up with an "Access denied: Occult/New Age" when I try and view that!!! Just what is going on with that ship?!?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Your school blocks Occult/New Age?
Well that POTENTIALLY rules out going to anypages that deals with Harry Potter or Enya - how crazy is that. Letme guess you can probably go to a page that deals with "Fisting for hamsters" or something instead! Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Lol; can't say I've tried the hamster site though... .
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
Quote of the Day!
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
One more tidbit about the explosions, a quote by David Livingston:
"...What was tough was the post on the show and the second unit that went on to blow up the ship. Rob Legato had Stage 10 and we built large scale mock-ups of the Enterprise and of the other ship, or at least the nacelle on the other ship and we kept blowing up stuff on Stage 8. getting these tremendous explosions which we can hopefully use in the future. But Rob and Dick Brownfield were in heaven. They were like kids in a candy store. Nothing better than just being able to blow up something. Everything there was newly created just for that episode. We had a bunch of Enterprises, they didn't have all the detail but they had enough that when you cut to them you believed them."
Taken from "Captain's Logs" - First Edition published in 1993 by Boxtree. So the interview should have been from quite shortly after the episode was made.
Thoughts?
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
Thanks SoundEffect! Found the caps I made on this page... here's a bigger view of the same (hopefully this one isn't as offensive to some screeners ):
Here's a silly question after looking at those screencaps -- where's the Bozeman's impulse engines? They got covered up by the rear attachment, but there's no red glow at the end of that new projection.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
good point: no torpedos either.....unless they're cleverly located in the B-C deck. Nothing keeps the bridge crew alert like knowing there is a full magazine of torpedos just one deck under you. Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote: Everything there was newly created just for that episode. We had a bunch of Enterprises, they didn't have all the detail but they had enough that when you cut to them you believed them."
Taken from "Captain's Logs" - First Edition published in 1993 by Boxtree. So the interview should have been from quite shortly after the episode was made.
Thoughts? [/QB]
Great: they can build amesss o' Enterprises, but stick with an out-of scale Miranda with birth defects and no Impulse engines! ...oh well, at least It was'nt another Constalation! Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: good point: no torpedos either.....unless they're cleverly located in the B-C deck. Nothing keeps the bridge crew alert like knowing there is a full magazine of torpedos just one deck under you.
I always figured a fore launcher was somewhere in that huge-ass sensor dome at the bottom of the ship. As for an aft launcher, there's enough room to bury at least one somewhere in the aft hull extension.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
That large sensor dome at the saucer bottom has sensor spikes sticking out from the front. I'd put the forward lauchers in those sensor clusters on the dorsal of the saucer near the sides. Aft lauchers could be placed in the abutment (sp?) that was made so that the pylons could be sticking straight outward from the angled inward part of the saucer. The impulse engines (despite not having a glow here) could be placed on the aft part of the extention right below the 3rd shuttlebay's/cargo bay's landing deck.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
It's easier to see if you look at the color photo in the Chronology, but there does look like a distinct Reliant-type torpedo launch tube on the Bozeman's aft extension under Shutlebay 3. There's presuambly one on the other side for symmetry. I don't know if there's room in between for an impulse engine or not.
The lower sensor dome on the saucer is one of the aft under saucer pieces at the back of the Constellation Class.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
I thought there was a very pronounced impulse nozzle assembly below the boxy aft extension? The extension would effectively hide the nozzles in aft shots taken above the centerline, but you can see it in the Encyclopedia pictures (real model photos manipulated?) nevertheless.
And why would this ship need a torpedo launcher at all? There was no dialogue reference to torpedoes (unlike with the Saratoga). The Soyuz class mission profile might not call for FTL space combat beyond phaser ranges. And I refuse to believe that the idiocy of "all our ships can perform all our missions" began in Kirk's era already.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
The diagram on that page has a refit type bridge and structure below it (the airlock box around the turbolifts, the angled sides), but the Bozeman had the Phase II type bridge with the "Mickey Mouse ear" turbos and the more TOS like rounded superstructure.
Was that an Encyclopedia scan?
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
quote: Originally posted by SoundEffect: It's easier to see if you look at the color photo in the Chronology, but there does look like a distinct Reliant-type torpedo launch tube on the Bozeman's aft extension under Shutlebay 3.
If it's the part that's just beneath the extension, then the "torpedo bay" doesn't have enough clearance to avoid hitting the lower decks of the saucer when it fires. And there doesn't seem to be enough room in the antenna housing at the base of the lower tower for torpedo launchers.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
No, no...aft firing torpedoes. If you look at the bottom of the back piece of the hexagonal extention of the Bozeman, coming just out of the shadow, you can see a launch tube of the same design from the Reliant Rollbar. It's sufficiently on the portside enough that the starboard must have an identical torp tube on the starboard side.
I only mentoned the Constellation piece in case anyone was wondering where that detail came from...just like the Nebula Class neck pieces that hold up the Bozeman's upper and lower sensor pods.
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
Sorry...thought we were talking about a forward launcher. That should teach me not to post after an eight hour shift at work. Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: And why would this ship need a torpedo launcher at all? There was no dialogue reference to torpedoes (unlike with the Saratoga). The Soyuz class mission profile might not call for FTL space combat beyond phaser ranges. And I refuse to believe that the idiocy of "all our ships can perform all our missions" began in Kirk's era already.
Maybe for probes and the like? The Bozeman did look like it was heavily modified with lots of sensors... if it was designed for recon or even just scientific studies, probes would definitely help, as well as the ability to defend itself against any would-be attackers. But then again I guess the transporter would work for that too...
quote:Originally posted by MrNeutron: The diagram on that page has a refit type bridge and structure below it (the airlock box around the turbolifts, the angled sides), but the Bozeman had the Phase II type bridge with the "Mickey Mouse ear" turbos and the more TOS like rounded superstructure.
Was that an Encyclopedia scan?
I'm not sure, but based on the inaccurate proportions of the nacelles it looks like the base was taken from the Fact Files/Star Trek: The Magazine and heavily modified from there (that representation was basically just a rollbar-less Miranda with one sensor pod stuck on the back of it). Whoever modified the image to make it more accurate probably just forgot to change the bridge.
IIRC, the Soyuz and the Bozeman didn't appear in a side view in any version of the Encyclopedia.
Posted by Dat (Member # 302) on :
Bernd has done a much better modification of the FF Miranda schematics to represent the Bozeman.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
quote: Whoever modified the image to make it more accurate probably just forgot to change the bridge.
Give me a break, that re-touch is about two years old and all I had to go on was what was in the 'pedia and chronology. No DVD caps in those days, none whatsoever.
Besides, Dat is correct, Bernd's re-touch of my re-touch is much more accurate.
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: Give me a break, that re-touch is about two years old and all I had to go on was what was in the 'pedia and chronology. No DVD caps in those days, none whatsoever.
Hey, no problem from me. It's actually quite good considering the scant references available and the piss poor quality of the Fact Files representation... which is why I assumed you had just forgot to change the bridge module.
I, on the other hand, am such a wuss that I won't go any bigger than this.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Actually I only noted the Phase II bridge module a few months back when these caps became available.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
quote:Originally posted by Starship Millennium: I, on the other hand, am such a wuss that I won't go any bigger than this.
the back section is scaled wrong in that pic.
just saying.
Posted by Starship Millennium (Member # 822) on :
Yeah, probably.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Anybody got accurate schematics and shots of the ventral sensor thingie directly under the bridge in the saucer? I can find nada and I need it to build mt 2500th Bozeman! Thanks in advance. Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
It's the same piece used under the back end of the saucer on the Constellation Class. It has 3 vent details in the front, and on the Bozeman, the middle is still a vent and the outer two have those sensor prongs sticking out of them.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)