Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Miranda class ship in FC
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dukhat: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by PsyLiam: [qb] I'm pretty sure that the hightest registry seen in the first 6 films (excluding unreadable background displays) is the Excelsior, at NCC-2000, a number which was obviously chosen in the real-world as a "this is the start of a new generation *cough* of starship design", a reason which can quite happily apply in-universe as well.[/qb][/QUOTE]Yeah, I'm of the opinion that the only reason why the Excelsior's registry was 2000 was to imply that she was such a new and large ship (this was the early '80's after all, and the number "2000" at the time was regarded as [i]so[/i] futuristic). I also think the reverse reasoning was why the Grissom had such a small registry, because she was such a small ship. [QUOTE][qb]Regarding the 7xxxx registries... did they pick that range from the start so that they could do the 747 puns, or did those come AFTER they'd decided to give most modern ships registries beginning with 7?[/qb][/QUOTE]No. As early as "The Naked Now," the highest registries for brand-new ships was in the 5XXXX range. Only later did they change to 7XXXX...as if 5XXXX wasn't high enough... [QUOTE][qb]I did not know that. Are there any pictures to show that in action?[/qb][/QUOTE]Flare member MattC, who claimed to actually have a copy of the "missing" Norway CGI mesh, explained that because the ship was kinda never finished before being used in FC, it's underside was a badly-put-together version of the Defiant's mesh. Since he hasn't been around here for quite some time he never showed what he had, but seeing both FC HD screencaps and the Fact Files artwork, I believe he's telling the truth. [QUOTE][qb]Regarding building new CGI ships, the producers will have exactly the same issue as they did before. Building a CGI ship still costs time and money. If they started to show new designs instead of (rather than in addition to) Mirandas and Excelsiors, there would be a lot of complaints. They are both good designs that have an essential "Starfleet" look about them. If they wanted to populate fleet scenes with new ships, then they are going to have to pay people to build them, and they might not have the budget for that.[/qb][/QUOTE]You mean complaints from CBS, who would be funding this? I'm not sure why they'd care, if both a new design or an old one would have to be created essentially from scratch, and cost the same amount of money no matter who was building them. I don't think they care whether the audience sees an Excelsior class or a Rigel class ship. And the fans certainly wouldn't complain. Yes, it takes more time to come up with an original design instead of copying an older one (unless you just kitbash an already existing design, only in CGI instead of physically, which would be even easier), but that would be done by someone who is already on their payroll. And it's not like that exact thing didn't happen with TOS-R, with new designs for the Gorn ship, the Aurora, Masao's space station design, the Orion ship, etc. [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mars Needs Women: [qb] I always assumed that Starfleet reserved blocks of registries for future ship classes, so that's why we see newish ships with 5xxxx and 6xxxx registries. I mean that has to be the reason why Oberths have three digit registries, but don't look like anything that could have existed in The Original Series or predate it. And an in-universe explanation as to why the warship Prometheus has a 5xxxx registry. On the other hand, I can't really believe Starfleet has had around 79,000 to 80,000 starships in its history, much less 10,000-20,000 at any one time. [/qb][/QUOTE]Yes, I'm of a similar mind too. That could be why Ambassadors, while clearly newer and technologically superior to the Excelsior and Miranda, has regs of 2XXXX, while the latter has regs of 3XXXX and 4XXXX. [/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