posted
Were not the Maqui ships in "The Maquis (2)" represented to be about the same size or just slightly smaller than a runabout?
For that matter, couldnt you look at "Preemptive Strike" where Ro flies that ship through the E-D shields and parks it near a nacelle....if by knowing the size of the nacelle and adjust for distance and the camera, could you not be able to at least determine the size of that ship?
-------------------- Hey, it only took 13 years for me to figure out my password...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: someone edited their post. or i did too much LDS.. hmm
according to the Flare search a post in this thread formerly contained the word Rubicon.
no one leaves alive!
You did too much LDS. ...and Sisko ( in Emissary )says that the Enterprise was offloading three new Danube class runabouts to the station.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Somebody (Bernd? Boris Scrbic? Jack Bohn?) already did the Maquis vs. nacelle analysis, and found no size difference between the "Ro variant" from that episode and the "Chakotay variant" from "Caretaker". All the Maquis ships in the big battle scene also appear to be about the same size. But these comparisons are somewhat open to interpretation, since the battle scene has very few situations where the ships would truly overlap for meaningful comparison.
The battle certainly makes the birdlike Bajoran "impulse ship" look smaller than in any of its other incarnations, when we see it flying in front of the Galor's upper superstructures. But that's pretty much all the scaling info we can get.
As for carrying the runabouts, the main bay could have been shut down and the 'bouts stored on the entry ramp, blocking it more or less completely. Or then the supposed overhead sliding doors could have been used instead of the aft ones.
And as for the parking slots for the type 6 shuttles, I'd accept them as recharging stations. No need for space around the shuttle if all the access hatches are at the bottom of the craft anyway, and the refueling, recharging, waste tank purging etc. receptables are built into the hangar floor. For different shuttle types and sizes, the partitioning walls might perhaps be moved.
Sternbach makes an error in showing the craft parked butt against the wall, though. How does one embark or disembark the craft, then?
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: As for the runabouts, scaled as they are it is indeed a tight fit around that central column thing... there's maybe a 2-3 meters tops to maneuver, however if you think about how tightly aircraft are handled on carrier decks, that's more than enough space!
As far as I'm concerned they can be stacked one on another and nothing bad would happen
But it's not about storage space - you don't just park runabouts in the middle of the hangar bay. When aircrafts are prepared to be catapulted or even placed on the elevators there's usually more empty space around them.
Same thing here (I think.) Distances presented there provide very little room for error for pilot (or tractor beam(s) operator) who want's to relocate that runabout.
quote:Originally posted by Timo: Somebody (Bernd? Boris Scrbic? Jack Bohn?) already did the Maquis vs. nacelle analysis, and found no size difference between the "Ro variant" from that episode and the "Chakotay variant" from "Caretaker".
Wow, I didn't know that... That's great news That means there's no size difference between those two types, just remodeled cockpit among other things, no doubt, but the actual hull is the same type. Thanks Timo for sharing that
-------------------- "Do I remember about my amnesia?"
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy: Man I love parallelism.
Yeah, that was a good episode! lol!
About the 'bouts in the big D's main shuttle bay... wasn't there enough room for them to maneuvre around the central control area and further into the 'bowels' of the ship/saucer/shuttlebay?
Maybe they were tractored there? How many things can the E-D tractor at once? How many Tractor emitters are there on the E-D?
Andrew
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Plenty. Some of which apparently hang in open space or dangle at the ends of long poles, if the tractoring scenes of e.g. "Time Squared" are any indication...
I'd suggest scaling the Chakotay and Ro ships according to their cabins, and then adding some artistic-license extra to the Chakotay vessel, to create plausible internal sizes. Just say that these two hulls, plus the lower half of the DS9 USS Yeager, are from a manufacturer that prefers this shape while varying size.
All these hulls seem to have big wings, which probably imply atmospheric capacity - perhaps form dictates function to such a degree that the "scaling paradox" actually is excusable here. After all, aircraft do tend to look "scaled". Just compare something like Tu-26, Su-24, and Tornado - size doesn't much alter the way your swing-wing bomber looks.
posted
Really slow for a Galaxy class is still 2,000 kilometers per second! I for one don't tink the Chakotay raider could be the same as the Maquis Raider from the prior episode....even though the model was just a re-dress of it. Chakotay's raider has over 50 jerks on it...and judging by the design the ship is mostly wings and engines. I have to defer to Brend's vision of a 35-50 meter vessel that could easily land or hide in an atmosphere.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I believe Chakotay's crew only numbered in the 40's, but regardless of whether the space was cramped, we don't know the circumstances of how they came to be on that ship that fateful day. It could be that the ship, as a Federation taransport, only houses a crew of 15-20 or so, but one morning Gul Evek finds a Maquis base and 40+ Maquis pile into the ship to escape with their lives and then get swept into the Delta Quadrant while evading the Vetar in the Badlands.
Just because Chakotay's Raider doesn't look like it's big enough to hold 40+ crew, doesn't mean we should throw out scaling factors in favor of us all wanting the ship to be bigger than it is.
posted
I believe "Repression" mentioned that Voyager's crew was about one-quarter Maquis. The actual number depends on how many people you think there are aboard in the first place (highest 152; lowest 126; changes back and forth frequently).
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
when was the 126 number quoted? i know that the 150-odd number was said most frequently during the first/second season.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: You did too much LDS. ...and Sisko ( in Emissary )says that the Enterprise was offloading three new Danube class runabouts to the station.
i know i saw someone say Rubicon here, when the three delivered in Emissary were the Ganges, Rio Grande and Yangtzee Kiang. they edited their post.
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by CaptainMike: when was the 126 number quoted? i know that the 150-odd number was said most frequently during the first/second season.
I don't know about 126, but 127 was stated in "In the Flesh".
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
well, as long as the number only went down, it should be ok.. In the Flesh was several years after the 150 numbers quoted in 'the 37s' and so on.
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
lol!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
