SoundEffect has just sent me a pic confirming that the registry of the oft-seen U.S.S. Nash (DS9's "upside-down" Sydney) is indeed NCC-2010-5 and not NCC-2010-B. According to him, it's a higher-resolution scan of the same model pic we've seen before. Bernd was right!
There can no longer be any confusion on this issue:
-MMoM Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
Maybe it is NCC-20105 and the guy who painted it on the hull just had a bad day. (Or it was the same idiot who was responsible for the Brattain-hullmarkings...) Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
When listing the registry for this ship, I drop the second hyphen and have the registry as NCC-20105. This works nice, I think. Posted by Brown_supahero (Member # 83) on :
Are u sure that's not the Nash' shuttle? Intersting concept!
Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :
Remember, folks, people are not interested in reality, just their delusions.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
...and why the hell is the registry and name on backwards!?! "....the ship could only be identified as it flew by.... Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Er, keep in mind that the ship itself appeared upside down. A backwards registry hardly seems like the worst of its problems.
(And, if the ship "really" is oriented that way, than the name, now on the ventral surface, is on the right way.)
Personally, I'm not so happy with the idea of there being two almost identical ship classes with the only difference being one faces one way and one the other. But, there you are.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
NCC-2010-5 is, of course, equal to NCC-2005.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by Brown_supahero: Are u sure that's not the Nash' shuttle? Intersting concept!
Good idea. Allthough the ship looks like a Sydney, it could also be an executive shuttle (maybe the nacelles are a modular part of the ship, depending on its mission, like the Danube-pod). And IIRC the executive shuttles from TUC were also used to pic up the survuvors of the Enterprise-crash in Generations. In other words: we know those vessels were used as shuttles by Nebula-class ships as well.
On the other hand, this would indicate the starship Nash's registry is NCC-2010...
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Er, keep in mind that the ship itself appeared upside down. A backwards registry hardly seems like the worst of its problems.
(And, if the ship "really" is oriented that way, than the name, now on the ventral surface, is on the right way.)
Personally, I'm not so happy with the idea of there being two almost identical ship classes with the only difference being one faces one way and one the other. But, there you are.
I'd say that Sisko had Kira put the Temporal Investigations guy's ship into a holding pattern as long as possible untill they cleaned up the coridors leading from the lower pylon to OPs of tribbles. The silly upside down docking is the result of a protracted flight path and it makes zero difference if it's not oriented with the station due to rotating airlocks. We'll just have to pretend the guy placing the registry was drunk or fighting off posession by jack the ripper's spirit or some damn thing. .....or it was a initiation prank by Red Squad on the T.I. snobs (who really sees the outside of the ship you're in, anyway?)
NO WAY do I go for the "two identical ships with one having the bridge on the ventral side theory. Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, if we assume that the Nash is really and truly a starship class unto itself, then presumably the feature that looks like an upside down bridge is really Something Else.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah, a bowl shaped bridge on the ventral side where everybody sits in bean-bag chairs... Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Maybe it was indeed supposed to be a shuttle. The model may have been relabeled at the time when the "Sydney is a shuttle" legend was created. But then it would be a shuttle of the Jenolan!
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Noooooooo!!!! Tooo confusing! This makes the "BOP size problems" seem easy to explain away by comparison. Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Wasn't the Nash a little too big for a shuttle?
Posted by Akira (Member # 850) on :
does anyone have the screen cap of it docked at ds9
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Okuda has long posited the Nash, and ships like it, to be early/overgrown runabouts. The Jenol!n's bridge supports this (if only as a matter of production convenience) but having the command stations, transporter, and engineering doodads all in the same place. It's entirely possible that ships like these could be atached to large stations and/or ships...
Mark
Posted by newark (Member # 888) on :
Runabouts would appear to be their own super class. In the first episode of DS9, Commander Sisko says the Enterprise-D has delivered three Runabout Class ships. Later, in "Hippocratic Oath", we learn this particular type of Runabout is Danube Class.
From the above comments, I would guess that transports are related to runabouts and are in the super class family of Runabouts.
Runabout = runabouts (Danube); transports (Istanbul, Sydney, Yorkshire)
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Akira: does anyone have the screen cap of it docked at ds9
Of course if the structure seen on the Jenolen as the Ent-A bridge, is in fact the same thing, that makes the Sydney Class volume-wise, bigger than a Miranda Class. and about as long.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
This raises alot of questions. Is this a fifth NCC-2010 shuttle from some station of the Sydney class? Or could it be a just a hull marking typo?
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
It's the Jenolen's number, but it would've been taken off and reoriented to make the Nash...why not just make an entirely new number?
The real reason, is probably no one ever thought the model would be seen up close. It was named after Erik Nash, one of the special effects camera guys...not a famous explorer, city, scientist, or other common sources for ship names.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
We are pretty sure the executive shuttle from Star Trek VI and VII don't have anything in common with the Sydney-class treknology-wie (Maybe they aren't even the same model - the Scotty episode was made after TUC but before Generations, and in both movies we saw the executive shuttle variant. And there seem to be other differences. The two may look extremely similar, but the reason could be the same parts used to built both models. Has it ever been confirmed that these are one and the same model? If not we should drop th entire Sydney/exec shuttle relationship.) So the Nash was never supposed to be a "shuttle" or "Runabout", just the average courier ship. There have been other instances for strange shuttle-registries, the NCC-K7 from TAS or the NCC-xxxx from Starbase 1 (FJ's Manual). And ages ago there were those TAS numbers (NCC-G1000 or whetever) that some people (Jackill for example) assigned to the Sydney, too (NCC-S2000 I think). Maybe Starfleet still uses a similar pattern even in the 24th century. The Jenolan was NCC-2010, a normal transporter or scout or whatever. But Nash was just a cargo hauler, maybe not even commissioned directly by Starfleet, and was assigned the NCC-2010-S. The vessel has nothing to do with the Jenolen (I guess there have been an NCC-1000 and an NCC-G1000 at some point, too), and the S indicates it's a spaceliner or something. A variant of the NAR-registries (civilian vessels could use NAR while civilian-run Starfleet vessels use NCC-S). BTW, did I mention that I think the 5 is not a 5 at all but an S? Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
When was the last time we saw a Type 6 shuttlecraft dock with DS9 through the pylons? Only starships use the pylons.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
When was the last time we saw a Type 6 shuttlecraft dock with DS9 through the pylons? Only starships use the pylons.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
The Runabout USS Killmequick used the upper docking pylon to dock at Empok Nor, but I know what you mean. Still, those docking ports are really weird pieces of tech. They fit exactly for Starfleet, Klingon, Cardassian and any other Alien-of-the-week-docking-system, you can even dock your ship and leave it from spots where you even have a port (BoP), and they seem to be the same types of ports they also use inside the Runabout hangars. So I guess they could use any of the pylons or ring ports, too. Maybe they are just trying to put the Runabouts out of the way for busy days when most of the docking ports are in use.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Couple of things, Captain:
While it's clear that the executive shuttle and the full-sized Sydney are not the same vessel type, according to all backstage sources (Okuda in the Encyclopedia, Sternbach in ST: The Magazine, and the Continuing Mission) it was the TUC shuttle that was modified by Greg Jein into the Jenolan for "Relics" (TNG). I'm not sure just what the deal was with the shuttles in GEN. Maybe there was a duplicate model of the same shuttle, or something.
The NCC-K7 shuttle was from "Trials and Tribble-ations" (DS9), not from TAS. I don't know what Greg Jein was trying to say with this labeling, but I'm somewhat reluctant to allow that space stations are assigned NCC registries. (Although, it probably wouldn't be that much of a strain to the registry system we've seen if they were.)
The hyphenated character in the Nash's registry is clearly a 5, and can in no way be mistaken for an "S."
I prefer not to speculate on this issue, but I will say that I do not believe the Nash to be in any way "different" from other Sydneys simply because it was seen flying upside-down, and I do not believe that it is supposed to be its own class, and I do not believe that the Sydney is in some way not a "true" ship class and is instead some kind of uber-shuttlecraft. Beyond that, I don't know what to believe.
-MMoM
[ January 05, 2003, 15:41: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: Beyond that, I don't know what to believe.
Welcome to the club.
It is obvious that the Generations and TUC shuttles are the same models (nose, engines, the two tractor emitters below the ship), just using a different color scheme. I just thought the impression that these are the same model as the Jenolen was caused by the fact files or magazine (serioulsy, when have they ever been right about something?) by saying "lokk, that's a Runabout just like the Sydney" and drawing the wrong schematic of the NAR-vessel from TUC (compare them; I think many sites will have them). The nose section is curved downwards, not up, like they picture it. The way they drew it, it really looks like Sydney's little sister.
comparison Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Huh... based on those comparisons, it looks like the modelmakers chopped off the nose and turned it upside-down. Other than that, it appears identical. (From a behind-the-scenes perspective.)
I don't remember the exact dimensions, but I'm pretty sure that the Nash's nose was approximately 3/4 the width of the "notch" that held the docking port. (One of those three notches where the upper and lower pylons met.)
Therefore, the Nash-type transport is likely at least 150 meters long, probably more.
Posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov (Member # 742) on :
If the Sydney's nacelles are Constitution-nacelles, the ship is about 240 meters long.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I go with the Sydney being it's own "real" class and it being 240 meters long. Think about it: there are over 150 member worlds in the Federation alone and millions of people are likely to use civilian ship to travel from planet to planet: this would call for something like the Sydney to fill the role of an interstellar 747. ...it's really too bad we never saw more civillian ships in TNG/DS9, but for my money the Sydney class is it. ....plus I already built one in 2500th that is 240 meters (USS Bradley) and is used as a troop transport in the Dominion War so my opinion is locked.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)