posted
Timo: Nice suggestions about the desktop model. I think this particular Nebula could be ferrying those nacelles indeed.
Another possibility is that the Nebula is used as a testbed for the small nacelles. Maybe this is actually the first Nebula ever built (the USS Nebula NX-60xxx), and unlike the other ships that made it into regular service, it is still in experimental status. It is also possible that the secondary hull was shortened for the subsequent ships, and only the USS Nebula retained the long hull. I know that locomotive prototypes are often used as test vehicles, since the differences to the series models are too many to employ them for daily service (difficulties with maintenance and spare parts).
I should have a better image of the Future Imperfect Nebula somewhere, so I could measure the nacelles. If this model was made from two AMT kits (the big and the small Enterprise-D kit), the scale would be obvious, this case the small nacelles would be 56% the length of the large ones. I will try to draw a 2D sketch.
------------------ "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
Unfortunately, the pic also could be used to argue that the ship in question is the Melbourne, not the Nebula - the registry is *almost* visible . Anyway, the top nacelles do seem like 56% versions of the bottom ones, which comes very close to an unstretched variant of the New Orleans nacelles. So those engines would make a Freedom very similar in size to its forebears Hermes and Saladin. Niagara in turn would shrink to Constitution dimensions, provided that the Fact Files image is to be trusted at all.
posted
The blurry name does look like USS Melbourne. Wasn't this design meant to be the Nebula-class study model? Oh, as most of you already know, the USS Melbourne was a Nebula before "Emissary" changed history.
------------------ "Forgive me if I don't share your euphoria!" (Weyoun to Dukat, Tears of the Prophets) Dax's Ships of STAR TREK
posted
Can ANYONE grab that pic from "Booby Trap"? Or is Frankie-babe our only screen-grabbist around here I must say Frank's grabs are always so crisp and delightful... I'm thinking of getting a vid-cap-card... what is a good one!?! Frank...?
------------------ Ralph: Um, Miss Hoover? There's a dog in the vent. Hoover: Ralph, remember the time you said Snagglepuss was outside? Ralph: He was going to the bathroom.
posted
Perhaps the Melbourne at Wolf 359 was an Excelsior (as if anyone could tell what that ship in TBoBW was w/o being told, anyway...) and the one seen in the guise of that desktop model was launched later.
------------------ "Alright, so it's impossible. How long will it take?" -Commander Adams, Forbidden Planet
posted
I have an ixTV from ixMicro. The ATI cards are good also.
------------------ 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
Well, Ms. Bouncer, it would be ignorant of the producers of TBoBW to show a ship meeting with the Enterprise, have the admiral refer to a ship to give to Riker, and then hope that the viewers understand for themselves that the one the admiral arrived in was a completely different ship. It would raise questions that would interfer with the pace of the episode. It's all about making it easy for the viewers to catch on. And the Excelsior shown in "Emissary" shows that the producers went to great lenghts to eliminate any doubts and explain to us that this ship is the same as the earlier Excelsior. They could've let the Borg destroy it before you could see the registry, but they didn't. You should be thankful that they even bothered to show that they cared about the whole issue.
------------------ -You're crazy!!! -I thought I was pisces!
As for a class? Korolev? Springfield? Doubtful if it's Constitution, right?
------------------ "The things hollow--it goes on forever--and--oh my God!--it's full of stars!" -David Bowman's last transmission back to Earth, 2001: A Space Odyssey
What the caps don't show clearly are the ends of nacelles. I thought that the nacelles ends were blunt, like Constellation nacelles. Also, the "blotches" are where the windows pieces were left off from this crappy model kit.
However, new engines would not justify a new class designation in the absence of other changes to the hulls. Aircraft get new engines all the time without changing names or numbers: at most a letter is added.
------------------ When you're in the Sol system, come visit the Starfleet Museum
posted
Considering that what we were seeing was probably the private office of Leah Brahms... What would be the odds that the low-quality model of the Constitution refit was in fact made by one of Leah's kids, aged 3� or something? The same would go for the one in "Neutral Zone", with the nacelles glued in backwards. And possibly some other desktop models we see are also hobby projects by the respective kids of the characters - Jake Sisko could have been doing the ships in Sisko's office.
. Anyway, the top nacelles do seem like 56% versions of the bottom ones, which comes very close to an unstretched variant of the New Orleans nacelles. So those engines would make a Freedom very similar in size to its forebears Hermes and Saladin. Niagara in turn would shrink to Constitution dimensions, provided that the Fact Files image is to be trusted at all.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
