posted
If anyone has a chance to see the Feb 2002 issue of Star Trek: The Magazine, Rick Sternbach showcases a number of sketches for the DS9 runabout. His first few sketches have the craft labeled "City of New Orleans" with no "U.S.S." but with a registry in the 65000s. It also has DS9 runabout 3 on the side.
So, if the runabout was supposed to be attached to DS9 (thus, runabout "3"), it can't belong to a USS City of New Orleans NCC-65XXX. Although it didn't have a USS prefix, Sternbach probably wanted the craft named City of New Orleans with a registry of NCC-65XXX.
Since Sternbach used City of New Orleans as the name on the concept sketch, perhaps the prototype of the New Orleans class really was called the USS City of New Orleans. Thoughts?
The New Orleans Class is certianly not a Runabout, and it's NX is probably in the mid to early 5xxxx.
The Runabouts on DS9 became the Danube Class, as the DS9 TM states--- something that Rick worked on. The DS9 TM also gives a build time line and the NX registry number.
Now... if I totally misunderstood the statement.
The New Orleans of BoBW fame had an NX named "New Orleans" ... just like the Sovereign Class has an NX named "Sovereign" . I've never liked the idea of the NX being "Royal Sovereign." It's a nice name and all, but if the NX was the "Royal Sovereign" then the plaque on the E-E would say "Royal Sovereign Class" and not just "Sovereign Class." [Remember we aren't talking about a discussion name... the plaque would have the full name on it.]
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
posted
Some of you take the enyclopedia jokes too far. The "City of New Orleans" was (is?) actually a train. Okuda threw that in his annotations as, I believe, a joke. I go with J's comments. The prototype ship for the New Orleans class is the USS New Orleans .
posted
I agree USS New Orleans seems the most likely candidate for the prototype name. I just thought it was interesting Sternbach used "City of New Orleans" as the name on his runabout sketch. Maybe the name is some type of in-joke shared between Okuda, Sternbach, and the Art Department?
As for the registry of the prototype, what were the other New Orleans-class ships' registries?
posted
I don't really want to go dig up the specific numbers for each of the New Orleans class ships, but the established ones were all in the 65000 range. And the Royal Sovereign, I believe, was a British battlecrusier of WWII era, HMS Royal Sovereign. Someone correct me on this.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
NCC-57295 USS Rutledge NCC-63102 USS Renegade NCC-65491 USS Kyushu NCC-65530 USS Thomas Paine
The prototype would have a registry lower than the first ship on the list. Additionally, we know from dialogue that the USS Rutledge is operational in, I believe, 2349. These two facts tell us that the first ships of this class were built in the early to mid 24th century.
Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Harry: I wonder... could this have anything to do with that photo of the New Orleans model docked to DS9.... probably not.
*slaps Harry*
That was a freaking Galaxy. Whoever it was who measured/calculated and pronounced it a New Orleans is either being waaaay too hopeful, or is off their rocker. You guys seem to have forgotten the state of the NO model. The thing was burnt to a crisp.
As to this whole "City of..." nonsense, the reference in the Encyclopedia was a joke. Besides, why the hell would SF even name a ship "The City of New Orleans"?? Does that even make any sense?? The answer, dear friends, is no. In any case, as the class is called New Orleans-class, the prototype would be U.S.S. New Orleans, not anything else.
-MMoM
P.S. Where'd that whole 'Royal Sovereign' thing come from, anyways??
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Really MonkeyBoy, I consider myself firmly on my rocker. If the Flare upload site was still around I'd show you exactly why that is. As for the condition of the New Orleans model, have you forgotten the lost "Emissary" footage? And those small photos featured in the encyclopaedia, did you not notice a distinct lack of damage?
posted
I saw the DS9 pic, and it looks like a Galaxy to me. It was just mounted at an odd angle, and part of the model was obscured by the station pylon. It was an optical illusion, Rev. Not a phantom New Orleans.
Okuda took those pics of the model just before he set about destroying it for BoBW, and had them retouched (adding window lights and starfield background) for the Encyclopedia.
And as to this fabled lost footage, I thought it was said that whatever-his-name-is did not maintain the same designs as from BoBW, and had new designs made up?
In any case, if an intact New Orleans model did exist, don't you think we would have seen something of it? (And I mean aside from one backstage photograph.) These models aren't cheap, y'know. They don't just build 'em and then not use 'em.
posted
You think a kitbash is expensive? an everyday model kit and a couple of marker pens is out of the price range of a studio?
There are quite a few ships that have only been seen once or twice, Curry, Centaur, Yeagar to name but a few.
I don't care what angle you look at a Galaxy, there is no way it will grow a set of dorsal pods, make the pylons attach where the neck should be and lengthen the nacelles.
As for the new footage, I distinctly remember that bloke saying in the interview that he went to a bit of trouble making sure that he did infact use the right names, regs & designs insted of making up some of his own.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
