Looks like the Nebula is the Sutherland (since the patched/damaged nacelles are the same). If the footage of the Ambassador isn't recycled from "Data's Day," it is probably still labeled as the Zhukov/Zuhkov, since the Excalibur was represented by stock footage and it really wasn't seen well. And the Constellation...
But wait...the Ambassador model was actually labeled as the Excalibur. See?
Good show about the Hathaway! When Red posted his vidcap way back when and I kept telling everybody it was the Hathaway and not the Valkyrie, no one would listen!
So, they must have really been desperate for ships to participate in the laying of the tachyon grid to haul that old girl out AGAIN! Or, maybe the ship was just left in service after it was reactivated in "Peak Performance." I'm sure there were plenty of menial tasks that a ship such as the Hathaway could easily and efficiently fulfill.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I totally forgot about that... there's also a few other images of the Excalibur from the TNG Season 5 trading cards with the new registry. Of course, this now brings up the problem that the Excalibur appeared as an Ambassador II when it left, and somehow reverted to the original configuration...
Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Starship Millennium: I totally forgot about that... there's also a few other images of the Excalibur from the TNG Season 5 trading cards with the new registry. Of course, this now brings up the problem that the Excalibur appeared as an Ambassador II when it left, and somehow reverted to the original configuration...
Three words: "Suspension of disbelief."
Can you do a clearer version of this pic? Also, I'd be really interested in these "trading card images" if you know where I might find them on the web?
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I already have one of the Enterprise-C here, but something tells me that you want one directly from "Redemption." As soon as I'm finished with the caps I'm working on right now I'll see what I can do.
They're kind of crappy since the trading card people obviously just took photos of the model and colored in the deflector and nacelles...
Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Notice the MSD says Science Vessel Vico instead of USS Vico or Starship Vico.
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
A question about the Constellation model-every picture I have seen of this class shows the lower nacelles being at 90 degrees like their upper twins; however, in the picture of the fleet leaving Starbase 234, the lower nacelles seem to be at an angle? Is this an optical illusion?
Another question, this in regards to the Nebula Class model-what caused the damage to the starboard nacelles? Weapon damage, or plasma leakage?
Lastly, can we get a registry for the shuttle Campbell from the available footage?
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
The Hathaway's lower starboard nacelle does look crooked. I'm sure it was unintentional. Or, if it was intentional, it would have represented some sort of damage. It's not supposed to be part of the normal configuration.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
For me, I see both lower nacelles on the U.S.S. Hathaway as being at an angle. There would appear to be no damage to the nacelles.
Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
You can see there is damage near the end of the starboard nacelle, if you compare the Redemption fleet shot to my ones of the Hathaway below. I think the rest of the damage is there too, but the scorch marks on the nacelle show up more obviously.
quote:Originally posted by Starship Millennium: I already have one of the Enterprise-C here, but something tells me that you want one directly from "Redemption."
Oh, didn't realize it was just stock. In this case I won't worry about getting an unique cap. (Since I've already got the fleet pic to use.) Don't sweat it.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I think the scorch marks are left over from its initial appearance as the Stargazer. They just never bothered to repaint the model because its later appearance as the Victory required no close up shots, the appearance as the Hathaway didn't call for a pristine ship, and the Redemption appearance also didn't call for or need a pristine ship. It was probably only cleaned up for its Exhibition appearance as the Valkyrie.
-------------------- Is it Friday yet?
Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by newark: Another question, this in regards to the Nebula Class model-what caused the damage to the starboard nacelles? Weapon damage, or plasma leakage?
I always figured that this was supposed to represent the fact that the Sutherland was barely finished and still had places that needed to be patched up. The saucer looks like it has some damaged areas too.
quote:Lastly, can we get a registry for the shuttle Campbell from the available footage?
I've been trying, but it's very indistinct...
Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
