-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Sorry to dredge this up but it hasn't been too long...
I researched the issue and found that the NCC-45617 registry for the Curry originated here on this very board with the speculation of a member named Lindsly. It does not come from a newsgroup post and was never quoted by Okuda, nor by any other insider. Only the name was. Said Flare member watched the episode and tried to make out the number, and that was what he/she came up with. He/She sent this information to D.J. Creighton of the Star Trek Archive and he accepted it without verification, and it spread from there. Needless to say, the latest DVD screencaptures have proven this to be incorrect, showing the Curry with the registry of NCC-42284.
NCC-42284 is the same number borne by the model of a similar configuration to the Curry, labeled Raging Queen, pictured here. This model is theorized to be the ship seen in the background of the same shots of "A Time To Stand" (DS9) where the Curry is seen.
My question is this: What exactly is the relationship between these two models?
I basically see two possibilities:
The Curry and the Raging Queen are the same model. After being filmed as the Curry, its configuration was modified, more battle damage was inflicted, perhaps it was minorly repainted, and the name was relabeled but the registry was not. The model was filmed as the Raging Queen and composited into the background of the shots.
The Curry and the Raging Queen are not the same model. They are two separate filming miniatures (perhaps built by the same indiviual[s]) that just happen to have a similar configuration and were both used in the same episode. One registry was given to both ships.
I really wonder about why they have the same registry if they aren't the same model. One might say that, given the "quality" of the craftmanship present, the modeler was just lazy. But then why are there two different names? And how would they end up with two identical sets of number decals?
Dukhat says he doesn't think the models are the same, but is there any sure-fire way to tell by looking?
-MMoM
P.S. Jason: Did you ever scan the pic? It would be nice to have a slightly clearer version.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I really doubt it's the same model. Painting issues aside, the damage patterns are just too different (i.e. damaged areas on one model do not correspond with areas on the other, & vice versa).
It's no stretch to think that Dan Curry or someone saw the Raging Queen (which, like the other models sans the Centaur, were never meant to be seen that close, as per DD's email to me), liked the design, & made another, similar, more detailed model to be seen closer up.
Of course, all of this can be easily solved if someone found Curry's email address.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, depending on how careful they were when cutting the model up to create the damage, was it possible that they could've put some of it back? (I know, silly idea....)
Personally, I think they're the same model -- I can't think of a reasonable explanation why they would put the same registry number on two separate ships...
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Oh, and Mim: could you provide a linky to the original false speculation about the Curry's registry?
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
Re: battle damage--- The difference in damage patterns is why I proposed that the model might have been filmed as the (less damaged) Curry and then messed-up some more for the (more damaged) Raging Queen. The Curry doesn't sport any damage that the Queen lacks, does it? Only vice-versa.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
This is really a non-issue. When I print decals for my models, I often make two sets so that if one turns out badly or gets maimed during application, I'll still have a backup set.
It often leaves me with a useless set of ship's registry (and it led me to give two of my Ambassadors the Excalibur registry!) so I think this was probably just a left-over decal that they used twice knowing the ship would not be onscreen enough to be ovious.
They werent counting on us Flarite's dogged attention to minute details.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Update: I have confirmation that the Curry's registry number is actually NCC-42254, not 42284 (which would duplicate the Raging Queen's). Dan Curry did build the model, although it is possible that someone else labeled it. However, it was named after its builder.
More on the way...
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
capped
I WAS IN THE FUTURE, IT WAS TOO LATE TO RSVP
Member # 709
posted
disturbingly geeky: i feel kind of upset that the NCC-45617 i've believed in for so many years may have been a lie. i must open old photoshop files and relabel graphics now *sulks*
-------------------- "Are you worried that your thoughts are not quite.. clear?"
Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Fuuuuuck: I just made USS Curry decals for my half completed model last week!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Silly question, the communicator issue, what number and month? I want to order it, because I would like BIG scans of the romulan model, as well as the other models shown, including Curry, and the dy100 pics.
-------------------- "The Starships of the Federation are the physical, tangible manifestations of Humanity´s stubborn insistence that life does indeed mean something." Spock to Leonard McCoy in "Final Frontier"
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Starship Freak: Silly question, the communicator issue, what number and month? I want to order it, because I would like BIG scans of the romulan model, as well as the other models shown, including Curry, and the dy100 pics.
Its Issue 148...umm, I think they are published every two months, so it would have been the Jan/Feb 2004 issue. Also, I have it and access to a scanner and have competant scanning zooming cropping skills and I could attempt to acquire better pictures for you (and others) to save you the $6.95 that they are definately not worth coughing up to find.
Also, does anyone have the current issue (with the Cardassians), I am interested in getting a scan of the Galor featured in it?
-------------------- Hey, it only took 13 years for me to figure out my password...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
) are literally 2 - 2.5 inches across to as a fore warning...
Printer-friendly view of this topic
