posted
Well, in fact I am delusional, but apparently not about this particular ship model.
Yes, I was also wondering if this ship might be a test bed: but for what? Was this drafting room only for propulsion systems or was it a more general drafting room? If it does not represent a test bed, could it just be a famous ship or one on which someone working at UP had served? Also, I wonder if Constellation style engines were refitted to all surviving Constitution refits or if this was a special case. (This assumes that Constellation-type engines were developed after the Constitution refit engines.)
Yes a screen cap would be most desirable!
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
I don't know if the Miranda/Soyuz in C+E was to be a Constitution refit, but I had heard that in some other show Geordi actually says "Constitution" but his line was later redubbed to say "Constellation" because they sound similar. I guess the ST:TMP Enterprise model is too heavy to work with or too expensive to refurbish.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
The Pegasus was originally supposed to be a four-nacelled Cheyenne-like ship.
The Constitution/Constellation redub was in "The Battle."
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
On the topic of models, has anyone considered that they might be the same thing in the 24th century that they are in the 20th--that is, artists' renderings? I mean, people create their own 3D meshes today. Who's to say that someone wouldn't want to show off the Nebula variant they just fed through the replicator?
IP: Logged
posted
There is a scene in "The Pegasus" where a display on that ship shows four oblong shaps grouped in pairs. Some people have interpreted this to mean that the Pegasus actually had four nacelles. Personally, I think it's more likely that each pair represents two wspects of one nacelle (upper and lower halves of the warp coils?). Now, as for whether that display was made before or after they switched to the Oberth model, I don't know. It may have originally been meant to represent four nacelles...
------------------ Rimmer: "Holly, put a trace on Paranoia." Holly: "What's a trace?" Rimmer: "It's space jargon. It means 'find him'." Holly: "No it doesn't. You just made it up to sound cool." -Red Dwarf: "Confidence & Paranoia"
posted
If the information we have is true, then, yes, it was.
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
I read somewhere that a Ambassador-era scout-type ship was designed as Pegasus but the model was never built. Instead, they went back to Oberth. Maybe this design got as far as an onscreen Okudagram, as mentioned by TSN, but the visual effects with Oberth were added later.
I've only seen part of "The Pegasus" (believe it or not, the cable transmission was knocked out by a typhoon), but I don't remember seeing any schematic. Does this ship look like something from the Ambassador era?
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
Frank, by any chance do you have a close up of that console?
------------------ "All you people, can't you see, can't you see How your love's affecting our reality Everytime we're down You can make it right And that makes you larger than life"
------------------ Frank's Home Page "We've got some new songs here that are not even on the MP3 thing. They're not available in any format, except of course the bootlegs that seem to proliferate all through our audience, as we watch people lip-synch along to songs that HAVEN'T BEEN RELEASED! DAMN YOU!" - John Linnell
posted
Timo: I guess you are right and you have just solved one of the greatest mysteries in the universe I also see the two tiny nacelles. The explanation is also reasonable in that the pod is hardly taller than the saucer, so it can't be the studio model (apart from being too small). The only model of this size that did exist is probably the one from "Future Imperfect", and why change it too much?
Seven variants! I have had only five so far, since I didn't count the CGI. The question is how many different variants of the Nebula exist as real starships. I think there are three or four:
1. The Phoenix with the round pod. The pod is probably detachable and the rest may be identical to other Nebula class ships. Still, it might be a different modular concept considering that also the support pylons of the Phoenix are completely different than the single pylon of the Sutherland.
2. The Sutherland.
3. The Farragut. Some detail changes here, for instance, the RCS thrusters. Might be a different (older) production batch.
(4. The "Future Imperfect" Nebula. The whole situation was only an illusion created by an alien. However, there is no reason to create a non-existing ship and risk that Riker detects that he is being deceived. On the other hand, who prevents 24th century model builders from kitbashing? They might find it equally cool as some individuals today.)
------------------ "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
posted
1.Frank - can you borrow out "Booby Trap" from the video store
2. Maybe those nacelles are the top and side views!?!
3. I had forgotten how fat Riker got! *grin*
4. Remember Barash in "Future Imperfect" took the "memories" of Riker to create a future... he had Minuet as his mother... now that'd be an interesting concept... The Doctor impregnates someone - and that person can't leave the holodeck
------------------ "Remove your hand or I will remove your arm!" - 7 of 9
posted
Some further musing about the "Future Imperfect" Nebula model:
The nacelles atop the stern seem identical to Galaxy or Nebula nacelles in shape, despite their smaller size. OTOH, the size seems to come quite close to that used by you and others for the New Orleans nacelles (which are a bit lengthened, though, as you point out).
Now, I keep thinking of those "five-engined" B-747s that ferry spare engines on their port wings. Perhaps this specific Nebula was ferrying these bulky and probably ultra-heavy starship components to a distant yard or a distressed starship? Every good scale model kit of a jet fighter should contain the mundane cargo pods in addition to the more flashy missiles and bombs - so every starship model worth its price ought to have the optional cargo sling as well. And Riker (or the alien kid running the fantasy) might have fancied using this option on his model to make it different from the models found on the desktops of other captains.
The question then becomes, which starship type would this specific cargo be destined for?
And the answer is, of course, Freedom or Niagara. Those could definitely use a canonically confirmed nacelle that's shaped like the Galaxy one, but is smaller to go with the downscaled saucer! Bernd, can you do the honors from that blurry picture (or the better one at Miarecki's home page) to see if they would fit?
posted
Oh, and by the way... The CGI Nebula definitely ought to be a subclass of its own. There are two significant differences to the Farragut:
-No short phaser strips on aft saucer -No impulse engines whatsover!
Even the Farragut still had the tiny grilles below the saucer lip to denote impulse engines, IIRC. The CGI doesn't. I'm not sure about the short phaser strips under the secondary hull fantail. They aren't there in the Phoenix or the Sutherland, but the Sutherland does have something that looks like two-sided adhesive tape in this location (according to TNG:The Continuing Mission photographs). The Farragut might have had proper strips fitted, and these could have been copied onto the CGI, or then not.
If the CGI is a distinct design, then there are five "real" Nebulas: Melbourne (as seen in "BoBW II"), Phoenix (as seen flying), Sutherland, Farragut, and the CGI ship. Only one of these is drastically different: the Melbourne has the longer hull. But mercifully, this cannot be seen in "BoBWII". So perhaps the longer hull is a mistake perpetuated by Monogram of the 24th century, and only present in tabletop models!
I also see the two tiny nacelles. The explanation is also reasonable in that the pod is hardly taller than the saucer, so it can't be the studio model (apart from being too small). The only model of this size that did exist is probably the one from "Future Imperfect", and why change it too much?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
