I just glanced over in the ST: Magazine how Rick Sternbech designed the Prometheus for Message In A Bottle and noticed that one early sketch looked like the Defiant Pathfinder... which became the Nova Class. It was interesting to see and if anyone can scan the pics so can others.
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
It would be interesting to know why did he put so low registry number and what's the deal with this alternate ship markings...
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
He put the low registry number to confuse and annoy people like us.
Posted by Bernd (Member # 6) on :
Did he put that low registry on the sketches already?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
There are no numbers (or even a name) on any of the sketches.
The article (written by Sternbach himself, and remarkably t(r)echnical) has a possible explanation:
quote: As Prometheus was experimental, the NX-59650 was added, down from a possible 74913, perhaps to say that the development project had been in place quite some time before Voyager (NCC-74656).
I have to say that the final drawings by Sternbach make the ship look better than the rather low-detail CGI model.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Interesting... I remember him posting that that registry number was a mistake on the part of the VFX crew.
--Jonah
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It is, but this is what he makes of it.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
For what was designed to be a one-off ship ne'er to be seen again, they Foundation boys did a pretty good job with the mechanics. The Nova was a slightly better job, I'd say. I'm just happy the VFX guys decided it'd be cool to see her again in a cameo for "Endgame".
Mark
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
Question: Were the guys who put the 5XXXX number on the Prometheus the same guys who gave the Akira, Steamrunner, Saber, & Norway classes those low numbers as well? I wonder if those were mistakes as well...
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
Nope, Prometheus was from Foundation-I and the FC ships from ILM.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
Like I have said before, the "long time in development" excuse just doesn't work. Not only do we have evidence like the similar Galaxy Class registries, but this ship was obviously designed to fight. It wouldn't make sense for the Prometheus to have been conceived in the 40s or 50s when Starfleet was all still about peaceful exploration. It was the Borg who made them start building warships.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The article says our very own Mojo and Brandon MacDougall were responsible for the Prometheus model.
I certainly appreciate this ship a lot more now. It has a lot of updated details, including what Sternbach calls "pop-up" torp launchers.
And BTW, the 'saucer' is called the Main Hull, and the other two are the Upper Warp Hull (UWH) and the Lower Warp Hull (LWH). Another tidbit: he says the MSD has 15 decks, and not 16 like I found on EAS.
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Even during peacetime, they can design stuff for conceptual reasons. The USAF and Navy build prototypes all the time for stuff that could be practical, but for whatever reason are not put into production.
I see no reason they couldn't have the Prommie built as something that a) just took THAT LONG to make into something that worked, or b) was worked on, then mothballed until they could figure out how to make it practical. In either case, they could have updated the design along the way to look more modern, a la E-nil refit. And to use your own peacetime argument, that could validate the first case as they didn't have that much reason to work on it very quickly.
Mark
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Perhaps the original NX-59etc. was something rather different. Or it could've depended on some technologies from the Intrepid or Sovereign projects.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
The ship itself (the spaceframe or whatever) is obviously not old because it looks too new (like a cross between Voyager and the E-E), especially because of stuff like the nacelles. The technologies in it are brand new (regenerative shielding, multi-vector assault mode, ablative armour). The insides are brand new shiny white - definitely not Galaxy or Nebula Class style. What exactly is is that was built so very long ago? Did they build a piece of metal, paint NX-59650 on it and mothball that to build the rest of the ship later? The Prometheus is (to quote EMH-2) "an experimental prototype". I don't think that kind of label can be applied to something built 20 years ago. And if this new ship was mothballed, why bother building an entirely new class (Defiant) when there's a Borg threat? Why not bring this one up to date?
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Who says they weren't trying to? In the end, it's going to boil down to "what feels right". And since this will be a matter of opinion, there's no way a single answer will ever be attained.
Mark
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
The NX number could be assigned to the concept of the Prometheus.
The year is 2348.. Starfleet Think Tank: "Hey Council! We'd like to start a Top Secret design study on a "multi-vector" assault vessel. Perhaps we can use it againt the Cardassians, Tzenkethi and Tholians!" Council: "Ehm... sure. Here, have a couple of NX numbers! Have fun!"
Then it turns out the whole multi-vector concept isn't particularly practical. But several years later, after the Borg attacks and the Dominion threat, someone remembers the old Prometheus project. They basically start redesigning the thing from scrap but noone bothers to acquire a new NX number.
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Perhaps the original NX-59etc. was something rather different. Or it could've depended on some technologies from the Intrepid or Sovereign projects.
How's about this for a theory:
The Prometheus is a multi-vector assault ship - right? It seperates into 3 individual ships - right?
So, the Prometheus was in the design stage and they needed a 3rd part to complete it. Along comes an older test ship that was partially successful and had the old reg number on it. Being lazy and in a rush due to the war, they never bothered to change the number.
Or you could just stick with the facts - this is just one of those annoying f***ups from the effects people that we'll never agree on.
Anyway, I thought the reg issue was solved in a previous thread, why bring it up again? Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
Or here is yet a stupider idea: Perhaps since it is 3 warp capible vessels integrated into one vessel...the main vessel has the NCC-7x registry and the vessel separated into 3 distinct vessels each have their own unique registries....
hmm...i wonder if they have interchangeable parts....say for example the Enterprise-D and the Yamato could swap saucers or something.... Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
The point I made (somewhere else) about the Galaxys is that the USS Galaxy is 70637, the Challenger is 71099, the Yamato is 71807, etc. If numbers were assigned to ships when they were "concepts", then the Galaxy prototype would have a far lower number than its production sisters. Unless you want to claim a design time of 6 months for the Galaxy. As it stands, it appears that numbers are assigned when ships are produced, and so the Prometheus would have had to have been launched in the 40s or 50s. Which is absurd.
I think that there is no more reason for each of the 3 parts to have separate numbers as there is for the 2 parts of the Enterprise D to have 2 different numbers.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
Everyone seems to forget about the poor old 71201 Prometheus... While the 59650/74913 Prometheus may have been started in the 40-50s, it couldn't possibly have been called Prometheus...
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
My theory is that the 59650 number was actually Starfleet Intelligence trying to confuse everyone else out there about the identity of the secret warship that was being developed.
Based on the comments in this thread, I'd say that disinformation campaign has succeeded. Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
...of course it didn't fool the Romulans.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
quote:Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: My theory is that the 59650 number was actually Starfleet Intelligence trying to confuse everyone else out there about the identity of the secret warship that was being developed.
Finally, someone agrees with me!
And I'd forgotten about the USS "Commanded by a Lt JG" Prometheus, but it merely confirms my belief that 59650 was wrong (hopefully deliberately, otherwise the Starfleet Paint Division need to have their eyes tested). Posted by David Templar (Member # 580) on :
My theory is that the reg number is a really bad way of dating starships, full of flaws and inconsistencies.
If you really need to date a starship, talk to her Captain first.
*gets shot*
Posted by Futurama Guy (Member # 968) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phoenix: I think that there is no more reason for each of the 3 parts to have separate numbers as there is for the 2 parts of the Enterprise-D to have 2 different numbers.
Hey junior, I think you missed the point with what I said: "Perhaps since it is 3 warp capible vessels integrated into one vessel...the main vessel has the NCC-7x registry and when the vessel is separated into 3 distinct vesselseach would have their ownunique registries...."
The saucer of a Galaxyis not warp capible and therefore really cannot be defined as a true 'starship' on its own, and therefore contains the registry of its mothership (the stardrive section).
HOWEVER, seeing as the Prometheus can separate into 3 individual warp capable vessels, allowing 1 'starship' to become 3 'starships', one could theorize that presumably each section is self-sustaining (as each are warp capable), suggesting the possibility that each warp capible section has its own unique registry number, just as any other warp capible starship generally has its own. Were they simple impluse driven door wedges then I would say otherwise.
In anycase, so little is known about the Prometheus, one hates to theorize about this, however it does at least make a little sense, if not some creative logic, much more than the idle chatter to which i am defending against.
Posted by Fleet-Admiral Michael T. Colorge (Member # 144) on :
In the article, Sternbech based the ship on Voyager and added Enterprise-E components to it. That's why it looks so new and shiny.
In the Star Trek universe... the Prometheus could have been a testbed ship for technologies that were later incorporated into the Sovereign and Intrepid Classes. I know it's non-canon but in my ST Bridge Commander game, the regenerative shielding system was first used on the Prometheus along with the ablative hull armor.
Now, can anyone please scan the Sternbech sketches so we can see them.
Posted by Phoenix (Member # 966) on :
Ooops. Sorry
That does make sense. Although I would have thought it more likely that they would be given registries like 74913-1 or 74913-B rather than completely different ones. But I suppose its possible...
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
As Part 4 of my Scanning Marathon, here are scans of the full article:
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy: HOWEVER, seeing as the Prometheus can separate into 3 individual warp capable vessels, allowing 1 'starship' to become 3 'starships'..
OR...3 ships to become one.
"CONSTRUCTICONS! Join & form DEVASTATOR!!"
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
Thanks, Mim!
Looking at those final CGI shots, I'm again wondering if there are a pair of phaser arrays mounted on the rim of the main hull. In Sternbach's own sketches they're obviously sensors with the same recessed style as Voyager, but on the final CGI they look raised, like phasers.
Having phasers mounted on the rim would be an interesting -- if possibly superfluous -- idea.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)