hehe, i've only see that ship once (IIRC) and can't really remember how it looks, is it any worth trying to find a screen cap of it?
Buzz
-------------------- "Tom is Canadian. He thereby uses advanced humour tecniques, such as 'irony', 'sarcasm', and werid shit'. If you are not qualified in any of these, it will be risky for you to attempt to decipher what he means. Just smile and carry on." - PsyLiam; 16th June
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
There exists a "garage kit" by Victory Productions for converting an Excelsior, without the need for a Miranda kit. Now all you need is the vital parts of an Excelsior...
posted
Um, I like the idea that the Centaur is of the CHIMERA class - which we know exists. It (I think has Excelsior contemporary registries) and it fits with the 'mythic creature' aspect. To me, it could be the 'mirandarised' version of the Excelsior that we've never seen... we already have the 'miranda'/'connie' and the 'nebbie'/'galaxy', we were GOING to have a Ambassador version in one TNG ep - but it fell through cause of money... and there was going to be a Sovvie version in FC but was scrapped.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Sorry but I don't think it's a good idea, Andrew. The only known Chimera-class ship has a rego of 57418. I personally think that's too high for an Excelsior alike design.
I agree it's fair to say that the Centaur is the Miranda-ized Excelsior. The Steamrunner-class is probably the closest to a Miranda-ized Sovereign. But yes, there's nothing we know of that could possibly go with Ambassador.
posted
About a year ago, I came up with a hypothesis about which classes the Centaur & the Curry belonged to. Basically, I took their registry numbers and added the ships to my shiplist, which coincidentally, is grouped by chronological registry numbers. Guess what? The two closest conjectural classes to the ships were the Renaissance and the Mediterranean. So what, you say? Well, I also took clues from statements made about the ships from the Ren & Med classes, namely the Aries & the Lalo, respectively.
First, the Aries is described by Kyle Riker as a small scoutship. I immediately thought of the Centaur. If you note, even though she has an Excelsior-type saucer, it must be scaled down, because the whole ship is only about as big as the Jem'Hadar fighter. Second, the Lalo is described by both Will Riker and Adm. Hanson as a Starfleet freighter. Well, rearrange the components of the Excelsior into what we see for the Curry, and it certainly looks like a frieghter-ized Excelsior.
Add these to the fact that most ships in the 4XXXX range are Excelsiors, and that the only two other classes with 4XXXX registries are the Ren & Med, it is not unreasonable to assume that the 42043 Centaur and the 45617 Curry are indeed ships of those classes.
Of course, all of these hypotheses are based on the fact that the regos are chronological, which I happen to believe (except in the case of TOS, but that's a whole other story).
quote:But yes, there's nothing we know of that could possibly go with Ambassador.
Actually, there may be. There's a rumor going around the internet that the unseen design for the Apollo class U.S.S. Gage model was indeed a Miranda-ized Ambassador. I found the design at Sci-fi Art or somewhere, where the artist claimed he had firsthand knowledge of the model. Registry-wise, the Apollo class does jibe with the earliest Ambassadors. However, until there's more proof, we can't consider this design to be canon.
[ February 04, 2002, 08:54: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
-------------------- "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
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
"...'Saber' conflicts with the correct spellings of 'Centre' and 'Litre'"
But there was no such Latin word as "sabrum" or "sabra", as opposed to "centrum" and "litra". "Sabre" came from "sable", which came from "sabel" (Greek). Apparently that came from the Polish "szabla", but that's so far off from the current word that it's hard to use to determine anything.
posted
NCC-42043 is the registry of the Centaur, per the Fact Files.
-------------------- "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
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Really? The registry was on the model? I thought the Fact Files just made it up.
Man, someone really needs to email Doug Drexler about the other models he based his drawings on for the DS9 tech manual...
-------------------- "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
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I have little problem with labeling the Centaur as a Renaissance, or the Curry as a Mediterranean. In fact, both could be built around a smaller variant of the Excelsior saucer, one that fits in with those Constitution-style nacelles of the Curry (and possibly even with the Miranda torpedo pod of the Centaur, but that's a lesser problem). Thankfully, an Excelsior saucer does not have easily identifiable scaling features like blatantly obvious deflector grid patterns, portholes or docking ports...
The Centaur needs a shuttlebay in order to be compatible with "Identity Crisis" where a shuttlepod from the Aries was seen. Then again, a type 15 pod doesn't need much space. Perhaps the strange sawtooth patterns on the ventral surface of the torpedo pod/secondary hull are doors for a ventral shuttlebay? In any case, the Centaur is not really a "Miranda-ized Excelsior" if it's so much smaller than its parent design. Perhaps a "Springfield-ized Galaxy" would be better - different nacelles, different scale, same hull shapes.
It's not completely satisfactory to have ships with 42-45000 range regos and TOS movie era components, but that's what we have to live with. Apparently, Excelsior tech didn't make a breakthrough with USS Excelsior yet, but took its own sweet time to become widespread.
posted
Incidentally, does anybody know where I could find a diagram of the Curry with the nacelles correctly proportioned?
That is, one where the nacelles are true to the screen appearance, and not scaled down to fit the perception that they must be Constitution nacelles bolted to an Excelsior saucer?
I'm sure somebody must have made a diagram like that, and done the associated measurements and calculations. Or do I really have to do it all myself?
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
I don't even know where to place the saucer in relation to the secondary hull. From the perspective in 'A Time to Stand' you can't see anything. And sadly we have no other pictures of the model.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Timo makes a good point with regards to the Curry. By "correcting" the size of the nacelles in diagrams it is actually making the drawing less accurate of what's canon.
OTOH, I think it's even worse to treat the saucers of the Curry and Centaur as something smaller than the Excelsior. We know they are built from Excelsior saucers (and engineering hull w/ the Curry) and scaling those is far more problematic than simple nacelles.
Another thing, wouldn't it be best to place the Curry as Renaissance-class? That way all known ships of the class would be together, in order, on my shiplist. The Centaur is currently smack-bang in-between the large group of Excelsiors on my list.
posted
The only problem with that is that the Curry looks nothing like a small scout ship.
Timo: You bring up an interesting point. The whole reason why the Ambassador class looks the way it does was because Okuda, Sternbach, et. al wanted a design that fit between the Excelsior and the Galaxy. Originally, we were supposed to believe that the Galaxy was the replacement for the Ambassador, which was the replacement for the Excelsior, which was the replacement for the Constitution.
However, that's not the case registry-wise. Instead, it appears that the Ambassador, while perhaps intended as an Excelsior replacement, never got off the ground, so to speak. Conversely, the Excelsior was so popular for some reason, that it actually exceeded the Ambassador.
-------------------- "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
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
