posted
Alright, I'm pretty much ticked off in general with Star Trek but this...
The latest issue of Star Trek: Magazine has a special on the E-E. It says that the Phasers are Type-12. I feel they have dropped the ball on this one. In the first place the only source for Type-12 on the E-E is from a fandom poster [the name currently escapes me]. Secondly people involved with Star Trek and the design of the E-E have specifically stated it has Type-10. Beyond all that, where is the Type-11 at? There should be a ship with Type-11 out there before there is one with Type-12. Com'on, we know the Excelsior had Type-8 and the Galaxy had Type-10, which leaves the Ambassador inbetween with Type-9. There is no ship at all that can be between the Galaxy and Sovereign with Type-11. The final rant in all this, their little Type-12 goof adds to the types = versions arguement. End rant...
Is there anyone else out there as shocked at this as I am?
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
posted
You're making quite a lot of assumptions there, J. And we all know what happens when people assume..
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
To be fair, the type 8 and 10 statements are canon (the former barely-visual canon from "Generations", the latter dialogue canon from "Conundrum"), while the type 9 statement is more or less backed by the infamous DS9 TM. So not all that much "making-up input" was required...
posted
The point was not that the Ambassador had Type-9... the point was that there was a major ship class in between the Excelsior which had type 8 and the Galaxy which has type 10... with the possibility of being the connecting Type-9.
There is no such ship to fill in that gap between the Galaxy and Sovereign [the only two possible are the Intrepid and Akira... neither have Type-11].
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
posted
Not to mention that there is no evidence of the existence of a Type XII phaser. Unless you count a certain poster...
BTW, I already wrote this in the "Nova Class armaments" thread, but in case you didn't read it:
"One last interesting thing to note about the E-E tactical article is that it shows a picture of the supposed layout of the shields. They extend in a straight line from nacelle to nacelle at the stern instead of curving back in...also, if you look closely at the actual photos of the E-E Main Engineering, notice the diagram of the ship on the "pool table" master systems display console. It's from the original design of the E-E, not the final one (note the Bussard collectors)."
posted
Um... that Enterprise-E cutaway poster you're complaining about has the Paramount logo emblazoned on it. Plus it mentions that the Art Department supported the artist -- and he mentions Eaves, Zimmerman, Okuda, Sternbach, and Drexler all by name.
How do I know this? Because I have that poster.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
posted
The first place I ever heard of the type XII phasers was in the March-April 97 issue of the old GEC Concordance. Page 4 had a list of stats for the Sovereign-class, and that's where I saw "Main Ship Type XII Phasers - 7.2 mw."
As long as we're ranting about ST: The Magazine, I have one question about the guys who do the blueprints and cutaways of the ships: are these guys on drugs, or just blind?
Case in point: the cutaway of the E-E in the current issue. Take a look at what they call the forward sensor array. Call me crazy, but that looks a whole lot likea topredo launcher to me. To add insult to injury, what they call the forward torpedo launcher is some kind of conduit connected to the main deflector.
As for the blueprints, its rare when the drawing actually matches what the studio model or cgi master looks like. Probably the worst of the recent offenders were the E-B and the future E-D. Sometimes I think they hired their draftsmen from the "designers" who used to produce those wonderful models from AMT/ERTL.
-------------------- The difference between genius and idiocy? Genius has its limits.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
