posted
I've been thinking about the Sydney class and her sister, the nameless DS9 ship. It is my contention that the DS9 vessel is meant to be a different class, and not just the Sydney upside down.
Notice the angle on the nacelles. As far as I can recall, those on the Jenolan were at right angles. These appear to be slanted, though that may just be due to the slope the ship itself is at.
Furthermore, I'm still laboring under the assumption that this ship is somewhat smaller than the Sydney. Is there anything to scale it against? Other than DS9?
Of course, as TSN mentioned to me, the real answer depends on the bridge module. If it was moved to the new "top", I'd have a real case. Anyone know of any pictures?
Too many smilies? Well, I've had several Tootsie Rolls tonight.
------------------ "Stirs a large iron pot. Casting a spell on Vermont." -- John Linnell
The First One
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed
Member # 35
posted
Actually, I reckon it has movable nacellle pylons. . . they lift up for warp, hence they were up when the Jenol*n crashed on the Dyson Sphere - they didn't have time to lower them. . .
OR The nacelles are meant to be down, but can be raised for landings. . .
OR the ship was upside down on the Sphere and it didn't matter because they had artificial gravity anyway!
Look, I'll come in again. . .
But haven't we only see one Sydney-class with its nacelles up, right?
------------------ "'Psychos' do not explode when sunlight hits them! I don't give a f*** how crazy they are!"
posted
The only thing I can say about the Sydney class regarding it's scale is that it is several decks thick. Vid caps clearly show rows of windows. It is therefore probably 3 to 4 times the size of a Danube Class runabout.
posted
Well, the thing I noticed about the nacelles was the angle. According to the fanmade schematic I'm looking at, the Sydney's nacelles start out right at the centerline.
------------------ "Stirs a large iron pot. Casting a spell on Vermont." -- John Linnell
posted
It's impossible to see if somebody had the presence of mind to move the bridge dome to the "new topside" of the model, but one can say for sure that the DS9 version of the ship *is* structurally different from the "Relics" version. Not because any of the plastic parts were moved (I think none were), but because the "Chrysalis" screencap clearly shows an "impulse glow" from the rear.
Now, if this were an upside-down Sydney, the light would be pouring out from the big shuttlebay! The impulse engines of the Sydney are difficult to locate, but they certainly can't look anything like the glow on the DS9 ship's stern...
So at the very least, the DS9 ship has had new and humungously big impulse engines installed. That ought to count as being a "new class"...!
posted
Welcome Timo! I recognise your fabulous contributions to rec.arts.startrek.tech. - I hope you'll hang around here a lot - to have your comments appreciated, and not just lost in the eddies of the usnet ether
Andrew
------------------ "Remove your hand or I will remove your arm!" - 7 of 9
[This message has been edited by AndrewR (edited November 02, 1999).]
[This message has been edited by AndrewR (edited November 02, 1999).]
posted
We have word wrap Timo so you don't need to hit return at the end of every line.
I agree it's the Sydney model that the production crew changed a bit and thought, "Hey, we do this and this to that and now we have a new ship."
Or. This is a replacement for the Sydney-class. Afterall it's an old design, maybe this ship is a refit.
------------------ 7 of 9 alarm clock: "Wake up. Resistance is futile." Dilbert: "I wonder if I could ever date a woman like Jeri Ryan." 7 of 9 alarm clock: "That too is futile." Federation Starship Datalink - Now with a pop-up on every page...damn you Tripod!
posted
Could someone please, please, get a screencap of the sideview of the 'Chrysalis' ship? It's the closing shot of the ep.
I really think if people saw this, we'd have a better idea of where the new ship stands in relation to the Jenolen. That's the spelling, BTW .
------------------ "Fire, Fire!" said Mrs O'Dwyer. "Where, where?" said Mrs O'Hare. "Down in the town." said Mrs Brown. "Lord bless us and save us" said old Mrs Davis. "I never knew a herring was a fish."
posted
Perhaps those aren't impulse engines. Maybe the shuttlebay doors are open. It's already been pointed out that the light isn't red (even though impulse engines are only usually red).
------------------ "Agh! Save me from the wee turtles!" -Groundskeeper Willy, The Simpsons
Sorry about the line feeds - It's just a habit I pick from minding the 80 char limit while using a different terminal every day. And I guess I'll finally get a signature as well... (BTW, how do I get the emoticons? Apart from reading the instructions, which you cannot think I'd stoop to...)
As for the Sydney-lookalike, I think this is the case where it is most likely that Starfleet would build several ships of superficially similar shape yet varying size. When warships or explorers or other special mission ships get "scaled up", that's usually to accommodate a slightly different mission profile and thus results in a shape change as well. But the job of a bulk freighter always remains the same regardless of size. And while the Sydney clearly isn't intended for hauling bulk, I think the same argument could be made for a passenger-carrying "RO-RO" ship (the ratio of passengers to cargo could vary from size to size, though).
So there could easily be, say, three sizes of Sydneys, with one of them built "upside down" but still using the same warp field configuration and other engineering for reasons of economy and simplicity. The DS9 size would match the size and "market niche" of the various transports regularly seen docked to DS9 - Bajoran triangular ships, the "Merchantman" as the Bok'Nor, the Vulcan ship in "For the Cause", etc. etc. The "Relics" size would match the large "Antares class" (don't shoot, let's do it in another thread!) ships of TNG. And a third, even smaller size could match Kasidy's tiny freighter.
Looked at my 'Chrysalis' video again this morning, and I've reached the conclusion that the pic posted above is misleading.
In the episode, there is no light bring emitted from the base of the mystery ship. Whatever happened to the pic posted, it exaggerates the glow, which I believe is nothing more than lighting glare.
And I noted a few banks of side windows as it passed.
------------------ "Fire, Fire!" said Mrs O'Dwyer. "Where, where?" said Mrs O'Hare. "Down in the town." said Mrs Brown. "Lord bless us and save us" said old Mrs Davis. "I never knew a herring was a fish."
posted
Timo: Where did you get the information about the Sydney shuttlebay? I only know that the original orbital shuttle had some kind of numbered cargo modules in the rear, I don't know any rear view of the Sydney.
------------------ "When diplomacy fails, there's only one alternative - violence. Force must be applied without apology. It's the Starfleet way." A somewhat different Janeway in VOY: "Living Witness" Ex Astris Scientia
Printer-friendly view of this topic
