posted
yes, they were all the thunderchild/spector/rabin/akira.... you have to understand something
its a complete and utter waste of time to rename every akira that appears on screen when you can simply copy and paste the model all over the backround, where you cant see the name/registry.
[ February 04, 2002, 20:41: Message edited by: Proteus ]
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The Encyclopedia does not have made-up registries. With the possible exception of one or two, the registries in there are all based on something. When the Okudas put it together they didn't say "Hey, this ship doesn't have a registry!" and pull one out of their asses. As opposed to the FF, where they say "Hey, we don't have enough information here!", so they invent something that has no basis in anything other than their imaginations.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The ships of the original series had registries which were created for the encyclopedia. When this occured, the registry is said to be conjectural. ONly a few ships from this series have a confirmed name-registry relationship.
Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Proteus: yes, they were all the thunderchild/spector/rabin/akira.... you have to understand something
its a complete and utter waste of time to rename every akira that appears on screen when you can simply copy and paste the model all over the backround, where you cant see the name/registry.
I think you missed the point. I'm well aware of the practicalities of CG, what I was trying to say is that the Fact Files doesn't "make stuff up" they get there information from somewhere and it is apparently the art & sfx departments of the respective shows.
So if The Spector and the Rabin are so specifically named then in all likelyhood these names were used in the show, we just never saw them.
I said "They couldn't all have been the Thunderchild" not "They couldn't all have been the Thunderchild, Rabin or Spector" because the Thunderchuld is the only reggo that we can confirm. FF names Spector as the Akira seen in "Ship in a Bottle", so it is likely that the Akira and the Rabin were amoungst the various fleet scenes in DS9.
quote:Originally posted by TSN: As opposed to the FF, where they say "Hey, we don't have enough information here!", so they invent something that has no basis in anything other than their imaginations.
quote:I'm well aware of the practicalities of CG, what I was trying to say is that the Fact Files doesn't "make stuff up" they get there information from somewhere and it is apparently the art & sfx departments of the respective shows.
So if The Spector and the Rabin are so specifically named then in all likelyhood these names were used in the show, we just never saw them.
No. No. No.
We know Foundation Imaging did the VFX for that episode.
We know they don't invent ship names when they're not going to be readable and when the script doesn't specify any.
Okuda didn't include any info on these names when he compiled the Encylopedia, which is where one assumes official info would be highly likely to turn up.
Basically, the evidence strongly suggests the FF invented stuff. Which basically undermines their reliability as a source of backstage info. Where before people assumed the stuff unique to the FF that it provided without citation had its roots backstage and was indeed "fact," we now have a fairly solid example of where we've caught them red-handed pulling stuff out of their butt (brown-handed?) to fipad their articles.
It would appear my first posting in this thread was something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You'll probably not find much a definate error on the part of FF from the Akira ships... if you really want to see something, check out EAS and the Niagara stuff. They really botched that one.
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
quote:Originally posted by Reverend: I promise you there is a U.S.S. Spector. Take a look at the "Starship Spotter" see that registery number? its NCC-63549.
No, NCC-63549 is the Thunderchild. The Fact Files accidentally flipped the numbers for the Spector and Thunderchild. The Spector is NCC-65549.
And the Akira CGI model has never been labeled as anything other than the Thunderchild.
The FF did indeed make up the Rabin, Spector, and Akira. But my point is that since they're an official reference publication, it's okay and these ships still "count", even if they never were onscreen. It's the same as with the Renaissance-class U.S.S. Hokkaido and U.S.S. Ambassador NX-10521 from the TNG Technical Manual, or the U.S.S. Danube NX-72003 and the Defiant pathfinder NXP-2365WP/T from the DS9 Tech Manual. They were never in the actual show, but since they come from official source materials, they count.
And this is true of the Encyclopedia too. In spite of what TSN said, there are numbers and class designations in the book that didn't come from anywhere onscreen. Such as the Antares-class U.S.S. Antares, NCC-501. Only the ship's name came from an actual onscreen reference. I don't need to go through all the examples.
Some folks want to try and narrow their perspective to the smallest possible field, and they're the ones who follow a rigid regime of "only if it was seen or mentioned onscreen is it canon." But in this narrow-mindedness they fail to acknowledge the fact that there is some information outside of that range which, for all intents and purposes, falls into the category of canon material as well.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:The FF did indeed make up the Rabin, Spector, and Akira. But my point is that since they're an official reference publication, it's okay and these ships still "count", even if they never were onscreen. It's the same as with the Renaissance-class U.S.S. Hokkaido and U.S.S. Ambassador NX-10521 from the TNG Technical Manual, or the U.S.S. Danube NX-72003 and the Defiant pathfinder NXP-2365WP/T from the DS9 Tech Manual. They were never in the actual show, but since they come from official source materials, they count.
No.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I have to agree with Tom. Unlike the Sternbach and Okuda tomes, the fact files were not created under the direct supervision of people working on the show. This is particularly evident in the total lack of hard infor taht tends to accompany the files or the ST Mag articles they get translated into.
If the files are treated as high on the canon scale as the tech manuals or encyclpedias, then you'd have to include "official" releases like the LUG RPG game supplements. And as we all know, *those* books failed their savings throw against sucking...
Mark
[ February 05, 2002, 19:35: Message edited by: Mark Nguyen ]
posted
Another issue is that, when it came to putting names and numbers and technical tidbits in the show itself, Okuda and Sternbach were the ones doing the, uh, putting. Thus, when they conjecture technical detail A, there was a much better chance of that turning up as canon.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
Do we know they didn't relable at least the ships in FC? Movie resolution is much higher than normal screen resolution, you can see more. And there was more than one Akira close enough to see something. No one doubts the Thunderchild appeared in later episodes as other ships, but is there any official source saying the Thunderchild was the first one filmed? I mean, maybe they designed the Akira-class Rabin and later renamed the model 'Thunderchild'. That Thunderchild was only the last one filmed, so all the publicity shots and stuff like that show the Thunderchild.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
"In spite of what TSN said, there are numbers and class designations in the [Encycopedia] that didn't come from anywhere onscreen."
"In spite of" nothing... I said that there was an exception or two. The Antares registry is one, AFAIK. But even the crazy Constitution scheme was based on something, despite its being totally wrong.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
The Naval Construction Contract Primer. For Federation schoolchildren.
En See See En See See What is this thing I see? This ship, it says En See See. It doesn't say One Seven Oh One Dee. But it still says En See See.
They should relabel it Six Five Nine Oh Three. That is the way that things should be. One thing that would be nice to see, If a certain name is on ship number three, They could end the registry with a See. En See See One Seven Oh One See. The numbers in the book seem a little to free. How did these things come to be? I just enjoy when I see a new En See See.
[ February 06, 2002, 09:49: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
