posted
An observation regarding the schematics of the Hermes, Saladin, and Ptolemy classes seen in STII:
I was recently watching TWOK and I happened to have my Star Fleet Technical Manual out. When those schematics came onscreen in the background, I noticed something. It appears that to produce that "computer-screen" effect, they just backlit the panel with a projection of a transparency of the actual manual page. You can verify this by comparing the book page with the screen. (If you don't have either the book or the film, there are some decent screenshots, and page scans at The Neutral Zone.)
So what?
Well, it means that now not only the designs are canonical, but so is all the other information on the page. (Specifically, the Class name and type, and the specs for the ships.)
So now, instead of three unknown TOS-era ship designs, we have canonical confirmation for the Hermes-class scout, Saladin-Class destroyer, and the Ptolemy-class tug/transport.
Also (not that it's important) has anyone noticed that this same display was seen on the bridge in STIII as well?
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
posted
I was always under the impression that the Hermes and the Saladin classes were identical, and apart from mission specifics, there were no other differences.
Diagrams of ships as filler in displays is an iffy subject as far as "official-ness" is concerned. Yes, I agree that the diagrams are canon, but as far as we know no ships of those classes were ever built, as none were ever seen on screen or referred to in dialogue.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
quote:Could somebody post the manual for reference?
Klick on the UFP-Logo on the sites I posted.
quote:I was always under the impression that the Hermes and the Saladin classes were identical, and apart from mission specifics, there were no other differences.
The Saladin has more phasers and the Hermes has no photon torpedos.
[ June 25, 2001: Message edited by: Spike ]
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
posted
Looks like the designs, and the registries NCC-500 and NCC-3801 are there, so those can be considered canon. But the names "Saladin" and "Ptolemy" are actually cut off...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The external arrangement of the Hermes and Saladin classes are identical except for the aforementioned weapons discrepancies. It is possible, however (though only conjecture) that their internal layout could be different, much as with the "transport containers" for the Ptolemy.
As for the names, while TSN is correct about them not being on the ships themselves, the displays in the upper left corners read:
CLASS I DESTROYER Saladin-Class Starships
CLASS I SCOUT Hermes-Class Starships
CLASS I TRANSPORT/TUG Ptolemy-Class Starships
While only the book and not the panels explicitly indicate the shown vessel to be the actual prototype of the class, I think it's fairly obvious. I am certainly prepared to accept the registries NCC-500, NCC-585, and NCC-3801 as those of the USS Saladin, USS Hermes, and USS Ptolemy, respectively.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
posted
Well I'll be damned! LOL. I was hoping that there will someday be cannon proof that there were other types of starships in the TOS era other than the Connie type 1. Little did I know that we had proof for nearly 16 years! Cool. Can you think about how cool those ships would look if they got the same type of refit that the Enterprise got?
The Mighty Monkey of Mim. I'd also like to say welcome to this fine forum establishment. Geeks are free to be geeks and trekkies don't get looked at strangely when they reveal some obscure fact about Trek, B5, Star Wars, or any other kind of sci-fi. LOL. Welcome!
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
"As for the names, while TSN is correct about them not being on the ships themselves, the displays in the upper left corners read..."
That not what I said. I said the names were cut off. The very words you are referring to were not onscreen, because the displays were round. The names "Saladin" and "Ptolemy" are just barely missing, but they are missing.
Note the lettering above the fore view and top view. If you look at the book, you'll see that only the Saladin has those letters there (they point to the photorps).
I want everyone to know that I am what some people call a 'canon freak.'I go very much by what we see onscreen. But, I do have to say, in this case TSN, I think we can dispense with the hullabaloo over some letters being cut-off. Most of the display is still there, and we are all aware (or should be ) of what the dispaly says.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Topic Closed
) of what the dispaly says.
Printer-friendly view of this topic