Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Centaur Schematics
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Boris: [QB] There is nothing wrong with including the CG model into the picture, but liking or not liking it has nothing to do with anything. Seeing the model as realistic or unrealistic has nothing to do with anything likewise, otherwise we could throw out warp drive and transporters along with the Centaur. Being indebted to anyone has nothing to do with anything either, because that's subjective. The show is the primary source. The model photo is a secondary source. The CG model is a less valid secondary source that has to be included into the picture defined by the first two. Given that the proportions on the CG model are different from those on the Centaur, the CG model is either a different ship, a major refit, or simply an inaccurate drawing. As far as the Baracus-class name is concerned -- it's not even official, so I'd prefer we don't call it that. Right now, we don't even know if the ship has a class, so the most we can call it is "Centaur" or "U.S.S. Centaur", which is shorter than "Baracus-class." Creativity doesn't belong here -- we already have a forum for it. Boris [/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