posted
I had always known that the evidence for the Magellan in "Sacrifice of Angels" was purely circumstantial. (The shot of a Galaxy immediately following the dialogue concerning the Magellan.) But what I didn't realize until now was that the Encyclopedia implies it is the same Constellation-class ship from "Starship Mine." Did the Fact Files state this as well? Given that the Constellation herself and the Victory were both in service during the the war has made me change my mind about this vessel. I think i'll go with calling it the same ship. Anyone else agree?
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
but then again, no constellation class was ever SEEN during the war, with thexception of the victory casualty list, so its also extremely possible that at least two - magellan and constellation - were new vessels of different classes.. considering the age of the constellation, preferably
[ March 07, 2002, 21:17: Message edited by: CaptainMike ]
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't think Starfleet was quite desperate enough to pull Constellations off the to-be-retired list just so the Dominions could have some more to shoot at.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
But the assumption that it was a Galaxy-class ship comes from the fact that the Magellan & the Venture (a known Galaxy) were referenced as if they were paired up, and the next shot we see is of 2 Galaxies blowing away a Galor.
posted
It seems that, if a ship is referred to w/o anything to specifically indetify it otherwise, Okuda just assumes it was the same as the last one listed in the Encyclopedia. We've seen this w/ the Constellation, Excelsior, Intrepid, and now the Magellan. So, just because the Encyclopedia says these things, doesn't mean there's any actual evidence behind it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Why doesn't Okuda just commission Flare to become researchers/proofreaders for the next edition of the Encyc!?! Everyone here has a differen't "specialty", Races, Starships, Weapons, Space Stations, Actors, TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, the movies even TAS!
Andrew
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
But was there a constellation class vessel in that battle scene when they retake DS9? If not then it cannot be the USS Magellean Constellation Class one.
-------------------- "We set sail on this new sea because their is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won" John F Kennedy
quote:Originally posted by nx001a: But was there a constellation class vessel in that battle scene when they retake DS9? If not then it cannot be the USS Magellean Constellation Class one.
Where was it ever said that we were shown every ship in the fleet?
If Starfleet was using Mirandas in the Dom War then why not Constellations? Throughout TNG both ships were portrayed as old and inferior.
-------------------- "My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you, I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
And the FactFiles say there were Constitutions, Ambassadors and nevever-seen-before-Miranda variants (or is that picture supposed to represent a Soyuz? ) in that fleets, too.
*runs and hides*
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
