posted
I read this qoute last night on the Star Trek wiki and on Doug Drexler's blog and I was wondering if any images of the ship below ever turned up.
quote:Interesting note I just found that there was second version of the Sabre with a 3rd Nacelle on top called the U.S.S. Saratoga, it also has a wider lower hull for a larger deflector dish and the 3rd nacelle was one from the D Enterprise. I had forgotten about that one!
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I just read the Saber entry at Memory Alpha. Apparently there were more ships that were actually rendered into lo-rez CGI from the original FC sketches than just the Norway, Saber, Steamrunner and Akira classes, but only those four ships were ultimately used, and one of those unused designs also had the name "Yeager" (making three ships with the same name ;-))
To answer the OP's question...AFAIK no other renders have ever been shown other than the four ships from FC. I wouldn't mind seeing this "Saratoga," if only to see how silly it looks with a GCS nacelle attached to it. Perhaps MattC might know more about this...if he ever posts here again. He was supposed to show us his Norway renders but I think he's forgotten about that...
-------------------- "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
Well, it sounds kind of horrible, but anything Trek based that's come from the pen of Alex Yeager is going to be worth seeing.
I wonder why the other ships weren't included if they were modelled. I mean, provided they were sufficiently different looking from the Ent-E, Defiant and Borg ships, it doesn't seem as though it could hurt to throw in a few more.
posted
I'm actually not a huge fan of Jaeger's designs. Admittedly when First Contact came out I was just like all the other fanboys with their love of the Akira, but over the years I've become far less enchanted with those four ships. To me they don't really equate to ship designs that were supposed to be a decade or two older than the time period of the movie, based on their registry numbers. YMMV.
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I think with fewer Sovereign traits they'd look more 'right' for their time, but the real problem for me is the escape hatches.
-------------------- I have plenty of experience in biology. I bought a Tamagotchi in 1998... And... it's still alive.
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
While the Saber at least has the old ASRV lifeboats that the Ent-D had (because it was textured from the Galaxy class), and the Norway has no lifeboats at all AFAIK, both the Akira and the Steamrunner have the new lifeboats that the Sovereign has. However, the Equinox had the old ASRV's, while the Rhode Island had the newer ones, and they're the same class. So it's possible that older Steamrunners and Akiras have the older escape hatches too.
But I'm not apologizing for them. I still can't stand their designs. I think the only worse ship designs were the Last Unicorn games ships.
-------------------- "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
"To me they don't really equate to ship designs that were supposed to be a decade or two older than the time period of the movie, based on their registry numbers."
Hopefully, you're not dismissing the designs solely on the basis that they don't look old enough for their registries. It's quite possible that he wasn't tasked with designed something old. It might make far more sense to say "the designs are fine, but those registry numbers are terrible".
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Hopefully, you're not dismissing the designs solely on the basis that they don't look old enough for their registries. It's quite possible that he wasn't tasked with designed something old. It might make far more sense to say "the designs are fine, but those registry numbers are terrible".
That's what I originally thought as well when I was writing my starship construction timeline; that the registries were simply a VFX mistake like the registry of the Prometheus in VOY was. But I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Jaeger wanted these ships to be older than the Ent-E and not brand-new. And that would have been fine if the registries were, say, in the 68000-70000 range. But 50000-60000 puts them anywhere from ten to twenty years older than the date of FC.
But if you're asking me if I don't like the designs because of their registry numbers, no. They could be brand-new ships and I still wouldn't like them. Of course I don't like the Ent-E either. I'm probably just biased toward Probert/Sternbach design attributes.
-------------------- "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
For generic starships meant to show that Starfleet has more than a handful of ship designs, I think they performed their services well. Sure, they don't so pretty close up, but that's the point.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, out-of-scale and impossible-combination kitbashes do the same thing, and not a lot of people like them either (except of course we at Flare )
-------------------- "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
This is a motion picture we're talking about. They weren't going to be so cheap and unprofessional as to make some rushed kitbashes and put them on the big screen. I find this sudden lambasting of the FC ships to be rather jarring. It seemed not so long ago, they were the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
