Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
TNG DVDs and the K'vort-class
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bernd: [QB] I was first alarmed when reading about the drill holes. But, as has been speculated before, if all or most of the later BoPs (physical and CGI) had them too, there is no point in this additional detail and it doesn't conflict with my previous considerations about the topic. It is interesting though. Thanks, Dax. Anyway, I find myself on the side of Mike and Timo concerning the importance of shapes. From a dramatic viewpoint, Boris is right that the author just needs one ship to be bigger or more threatening than another, or two ships on par, and the VFX people comply by scaling one up or down just as needed. If the budget would have allowed, I agree that we would have seen a new Klingon cruiser for all of TNG, and a huge new Klingon ship for "The Defector". Well, but we have to consider that even ships that must be supposed to have always the same size are treated like this (Defiant vs. Sovereign in FC, Bounty in ST III/IV). On the other hand, there is the argument that the tendency is to scale ships that they just look good relative to each other (Constellation-Galaxy, Excelsior-Galaxy), or to scale up small vessels so that they would be recognizable at all (shuttle in "The Doomsday Machine"). In many cases it was probably the sizes of the studio models that necessitated the size compromise in ship encounters. In all these cases, the shape is actually the determining factor. These ships must be still supposed to be a certain constant size, but it's been more or less reluctantly decided to ignore that. We may have to decide from case to case which is prevalent, but generally I tend to pay more attention to the shape. Finally, I would like to annotate that at least two frequently quoted sizes of the BoP are completely unnecessary in my view. There is no need that Martok's BoP should be any larger than the 110m long model. I doubt that we would ever see the roughly 25% difference on screen, even if the two allegedly different BoPs would fly next to each other. The other one is the D-12 from "Generations" or the prototype from TUC. Why can't it be just another standard BoP, only equipped differently, considering that there was no size comparison possible with the E-D or E-A, respectively? The nomenclature alone does not establish a size difference, just think of D-7 and K't'inga. [/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