USS VOYAGER MISSING
Starship Lost in Badlands
Federation News Service
Deep Space Nine has confirmed the loss of a Starfleet Vessel, the USS Voyager, in the Badlands this morning.
Voyager was an Intrepid-class vessel launched earlier this week to celebrate the New Year. Its first assignment was to investigate Maquis activity, the Federation Council Reports, though the exact details of this mission are at this time classified. The commanding officer was Captain Kathryn Janeway, and the Executive Officer was Commander Scott Cavit.
After departing Deeep Space Nine, reports the council, Voyager headed into the Badlands on its first mission. At 10;25, Bajoran Standard Time, Starfleet lost contact with Voyager and its crew.
"As of 1:30," Council Represenative Ganden Fosch said in a press briefing in San Francisco, "The Federation has mounted a rescue mission in the Badlands. The nearest starships were called on to duty there from Deep Spacer Nine and Starbases 221 and 310 to search the area, and I am told a task force has sealed off the Badlands from any Cardassian or Maquis threats."
No specific number of ships was stated for security reasons, but the Federation New Service ahs been told that the starships Defiant, Hispaniola, Merrimack, and Tecusmeh are part of this rescue mission.
"The Cardassians have refused to comment," Fosch states, "but intelligence sources reveal that one Cardassian warship may have also disappeared in the Badlands. Rumors that a high-ranking Cardassian official on board are unconfirmed, and it is not known why the warship was in the Badlands if in fact it was present there at all."
More on this news story as it unfolds.
Well? There are more to come.
A DS9 comic story depicted that the Cairo was one of the ships dispatched to search (identified by it registry number)
Updating our breaking new story reported earlier today, Federation Council Represenative Vincent Grant has made a statement:
"I have received the first report from the search team operating in the Badlands at this moment. It reports that at least three warp signatures have been discovered, and scans from the USS Cairo indicate that wreckage of a Cardassian Galor-class warship may have been detected in the Badlands. Those reports are sketchy and not, at the moment, known to be accurate."
There are also unconfirmed reports of a Cardassian fleet build up near the border of the Badlands.
It is not yet known where the where the other two signatures came from, or even if one is Cardassian, but it is speculated one is Voyager and one is a Maquis raider.
[ September 18, 2001: Message edited by: Veers ]
[ September 18, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
The search continues for the missing U.S.S. Voyager in the Badlands.
As a team of Starfleet vessels search the Badlands for the missing Voyager and two others, Starfleet Intelligence has been looking into all possibilities.
"We speculate the Cardassians or Maquis were involoved," says Admiral Owen Paris. "The Badlands are a major political hot-spot. Since Voyager was new, it is likely that someone captured or destroyed this vessel under cover of the plasma storms."
This raises other questions to the disappearance of a science vessel, the U.S.S Equinox, earlier in the year. The vessel disappeared in February and has not been seen or heard from since.
"We will do everything in our power to find what caused this or those responsible for Voyager's disappearance," said Ganden Fosch.
Reports that wreckage of a Galor-class Cardassian warship was found are not being confirmed or denied at this point.
[ September 18, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
New Developments: It is confirmed that Cardassian wreckage, that of a port "wing" of a Galor-class warship has been discovered. It is being brought back on the Defiant to Deep Space Nine.
A Cardassian fleet of 12 ships has assembled near the Badlands, asking help in order to find teir warship. It is not known whether Starfleet will grant their request.
Experts believe that one of the wasp signatures is from a Starfleet Intrepid-class starships. It is alos belived that the third warp signature discovered so far came from a Peregrine-class raider, a Federation ship widely used by the Maquis.
The connection these three ships have to each other are not known.
And doesn't this go in the Creativity Forum? *move*
As the search for the starship Voyager continues, Captain Benjamin Sisko of Deep Space Nine has commented.
"We at Deep Space Nine express or sympathy for the families of the missing crew," says Sisko. "The personell here will stop at nothing to investigate this disappearance and what caused this."
Starfleet Command has stated that the Peregrine-class raider was in fact a Maquis vessel. The Cardassian government has also commented that Gul Evek, a high-ranking military leader, was on board the Cardassian warship which is presumed to have been destroyed in the Badlands.
It is speculated that there was a skirmish between the USS Voyager, the Maquis vessel, and the Cardassian ship in the Badlands. Voyager's first mission was in fact to investigate a Maquis vessel operating near the Badlands.
It is possible all three vessels destroyed each other, or the three ships hit a very severe plasma storm that left only Cardassian wreckage.
I think I'll start that "Unseen Reports" topic somthime in the near future. Maybe tomorrow morning...
I'll stop rambling.
Pathways called Chakotays raider Antares-class, but thats an even worse can of worms. Dont call it that
Of course, they might all leave a similar warp signature....
At least you didnt say Antares though...
PS.. did you follow the link above and look at the news-page i whipped up? Had a lot of fun
[ September 19, 2001: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
This could be a fun idea...like an "online historical atlas" of the comings & goings of Starfleet as published by the UFPPIB for public consumption. Some of us are really good writers...& it doesn't always have to be "famous" ships, either.
Hm.
STARSHIP TECHNOLOGY DIGEST
DEEP SPACE NINE, STARDATE 53092.1 -- The Starfleet Construction and Planning Council made a brief announcement to the associated transit boards of the Bajor sector regarding starship registries. Apparently there has been some confusion in the weeks following the Dominion war in regard to navigational telemetry recorded from the U.S.S. Defiant.
Captain Wa-Hando 3 Reshtiriyuk, of the Information Bureau on Starbase 113 made the following statement: "Confusion in weeks previous there has been registry of the Defiant in reference to. As know many of you do, Defiant U.S.S. NX-74205 destroyed by Breen three months ago was. Navigational clearances to beacons you use updated was, as Sao Paulo U.S.S. NCC-75633 assigned to sector was. Renamed Defiant the Sao Paulo was by Starfleet. However, registry which same should have remained changed was to NX-74205." Captain Hando 3 continued, specifiying that the odd move in changing the vessels markings and navigational beacon was necessitated by a Starfleet Intelligence program attmepting to determine Cardassian intelligence in the Bajoran sector. Apparently the ship was believed to be the original Defiant by some Dominion forces and they attacked accordingly toward weak spots in the ships deflector fields. However, this inefficiency in the prototype design was corrected in the Sao Paulo. The new Defiant's registry remained NCC-75633 in all Fleet registers, and the hull has since been relabeled when the vessel came under the jurisdiction of Commander Tiris Jast, executive officer of Deep
Space Nine and Starfleet liaison to the Bajoran militia commander. J.Sisko, Federated Press
[ September 19, 2001: Message edited by: Veers ]
Unfortunately they used a lot of stock footage in 'What You Leave Behind..' and it was quite clearly labeled NX-74205. Not NCC and no A. This really cant be, since even with inconsistencies weve seen, there is no rationale for having a ship with the same registry as the first, unless they added the -A suffix
And the staff has said that there would be no new -A suffixes anyway, and i think a five digit number followed by a suffix is a little unwieldy. So all subsequent starships by the same name as an original one would just have later numbers (i.e. USS Intrepid NCC-1631; NCC-38907, NCC-746somethin) Thats how the Defiant should say, we just need an explanation why the hull was labeled such in that one episode
(Id just as rather say it wasnt and pretend we couldnt read it!)
We didn't see it but we know...
It takes at least 1 to fly.
It's small enough to land on a small planetoid
It's small enough for a runabout to chase after (with out being afraid of getting its arse kicked)
It can LAND - i.e. those Fed Fighters don't look as if they can land... unless large pads come out from the bottom... look at the wings!
quote:
Since we only have really seen one type of Maquis vessel, the old Federation raiders, can't we assume that the Peregrine is the same class as the ships seen in "The Maquis," "Pre-emptive Strike," and "Caretaker?"
Briefly, and this probably belongs in Starships anyway, there have been four different Maquis starships, which the Flare Association of Correct-Thinkers (FACT) have dubbed B, C1, C2, and D.
B - think "Bajoran" or "Bird" -- reuse of the Bajoran Interceptor-type thingoes from the Circle Trilogy. Seen only in Maquis use in "Preemptive Strike"
C1/C2 - think "Chakotay" or "Caretaker" or "C-shaped wing" -- May have been one model redressed or two different models. Both look similar, but in the first appearance (Ro's ship in "Preemptive Strike") it's a small single-deck two-person ship (the C1), and then reappears as a multideck 85m ship in Caretaker (C2). This design makes a couple more appearances, most notably "For the Uniform."
D - think "Diamond shaped" or "Delta Wing" -- Original Maquis ship seen "The Maquis" and described as modified couriers. Appears in "Preemptive Strike", in the mirror universe, and finally returns as a CGI model for the DS9 war arc as the attack fighter.
None of these ships were openly called Peregrines, but F.A.C.T. generally leans towards D being the genuine article, a view reinforced by some of Sternbach's comments on his newsgroup.