Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Prometheus, Nova/Noble Issues...
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bernd: [QB] Lately, I think there is more flexibility necessary to handle the various (mis-)labeling issues. I don't follow a strict defintion that on-screen rules over encyclopedia or hull number rules over dedication plaque. I rather consider what is the most likely registry or name for the real starship. For instance: "Zuhkov": This spelling makes no sense, although it is on the real miniature. The name is definitely Zhukov. The number could be wrong as well, why not assume NCC-26136 instead of NCC-62136? Jenolan: This is the only spelling that makes sense. I'll stick to it. Nash NCC-2010-B: Pure crap. Ignore it. Brattain: Hey, I'm engaged in microelectronics, and if the ship is named for Walter Brattain, I'm likely to believe it. Yamato: I wonder why there is so much discussion about this one. The NCC-1305-E was only an illusion. Now the tough one (Prometheus): The number 59650 was very clearly visible, and the text in the encyclopedia confirms it. I know this number is hard to explain, but I will stick to it for now. Endeavour: Why all the fuss about it? The ship was never seen on-screen, and there was only a hardly readable display of the number. The problem is obviously that the ship was already supposed to have another registry at the time, but there is no reason to believe that all Constitution registries are in the same range. Compared to the Constellation NCC-1017 problem this is really insignificant. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3