posted
Oh, and the article answers the question of shuttlebay or deflector or what have you. It is a WALL for the bridge to HIDE BEHIND. This is the most brilliant thing said since ever.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'm not sure I like this new CG model. It looks nice and all, but there's heck of a lot of liberties been taken with the original model. I like that the Miranda bridge was removed but some of the other changes seem excessive or unnecessary.
Is it just me or are the nacelles too short and thin compared with the saucer size?
posted
Oh, and if we take the red squares as torpedo bays, then they are going to be some FRIKKIN' large torpedoes, going by the bridge size - to size the relative size of humans.
They'd (at least the aft ones) would work as shuttle bays.
Or what about the two cyan coloured panels below the main impulse engines?
Andrew
P.S. The fact files suck... "This is the Centaur, it is a starship, it has nacelles and a saucer with impulse engines" Yeah, thanks for that.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Um... Where'd the windows go?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
It doesn't bother me that libterties were taken. The original model looked like ass. Since all the DS9 kitbashes seemed to have been done in a hurry, I doubt if any of them "really" looked like the original models. This revised Centaur is perfect.
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
Why don't you try to draw it as the pictures show it? I think with better painting the original kitbash doesn't look that bad.
BTW: Any news about the missing kitbash-pictures?
-------------------- "Never give up. And never, under any circumstances, no matter what - never face the facts." - Ruth Gordon
Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
Amasov Prime
lensfare-induced epileptic shock
Member # 742
posted
quote:Originally posted by Spike:
quote:Originally posted by Cpt. Kyle Amasov: OK, can we say this is the official Centaur now? And the other *thing* was a kitbash of the 'Centaur-class' done for the war? Something like that?
Why don't you try to draw it as the pictures show it? I think with better painting the original kitbash doesn't look that bad.
BTW: Any news about the missing kitbash-pictures?
Actually, I was thinking about that. Doing a comparison between the two maybe.
-------------------- "This is great. Usually it's just cardboard walls in a garage."
Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
Glad that most flaws of the kitbash were fixed - except for one: There should be a deflector dish instead of the two forward launchers. A bit more work to make the launcher look less like on the Miranda would have suited the CGI well - just like the nacelles were modified too.
The text, especially the idiotic remark abouth protecting the bridge - well, I never take too seriously what they are writing the Magazine.
-------------------- Bernd Schneider
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
grr.. they mentioned the miranda. the miranda obviously has nothing to do with this ship
posted
But the "deflector" launched torpedos during the epsiode... My rationalization with this model is that it's the "pristine" version of the class. The pics and ship seen in "A Time to Stand" represent a beat up, jerry-rigged version of what the ship ought to look like. They had been in constant combat from three months by this point - some of the ships are bound not to have that assembly-line look anymore.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
