Flare Sci-fi Forums
Flare Sci-Fi Forums Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Flare Sci-Fi Forums » Star Trek » Starships & Technology » nx59650 not the right registry #? (Page 2)

  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: nx59650 not the right registry #?
Michael Dracon
aka: NightWing or Altair
Member # 4

 - posted      Profile for Michael Dracon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Actually it's NX-01-A not NX-01 A, but that's just a little nitpicking...

------------------
"Reality is a condition that occurs because of a lack of alcohol."
- Albert Einstein

(-=\V/=-)


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Aethelwer
Frank G
Member # 36

 - posted      Profile for Aethelwer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The MSD said NX-01A.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
John Linnell: "This song is called...it's called..."
Audience: "Louisiana! Montana!"
John Linnell: Don't tell me what it's called..."


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs
astronauts gotta get paid
Member # 239

 - posted      Profile for Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What if the 5xxxx Registry was misinformation? It's such an advanced ship, that perhaps starfleet put the very old rego on the ship to portray that they had had this ship for years, while the internal numbers of the ship were the correct ones.

Actually, that theory sucks.

------------------
I bet when Neanderthal kids would make a snowman, someone would
always end up saying "Don't forget the big heavy eyebrows." Then they would all get embarrassed because they remembered they had the big hunky eyebrows too, and then they would get mad and eat the snowman.

-Jack Handey


Registered: Oct 1999  |  IP: Logged
Epoch
Geology Rocks
Member # 136

 - posted      Profile for Epoch     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The whole thing is a giant mistake. They probably didn't tell the different set designers what number to use. So the ship has the NX-5xxxxx on the out side and the sets have NX-7xxxxx on the inside. As for you website Nx001a use both and explain the reason to the best of your ability.

------------------
Death before Dishonor!
However Dishonor has
quite a disputed defintion.



Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged
nx001a
Active Member
Member # 291

 - posted      Profile for nx001a     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thanks for telling me that the Dauntless registration is wrong. I will probably stick to the old no for the prometheus since i am busy working on my website at the moment.

------------------
"We set sail on this new sea because their is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won" John F Kennedy

members.aol.com/mfwan/index.htm


Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Trip Tucker
Member
Member # 297

 - posted      Profile for Trip Tucker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Maybe the number on the plaque and the situation monitor was the one chosen by the producers, but maybe nx-59650 was a favourite number of one of the designers, or it had sentimental value. Who knows?
The designers try to maintain consistency, but sometimes they boob.
---------------
It is offensive. Fortunately, taste is irrelevant.
-Seven of Nine, referring to Neelix's coffee from "Year of Hell"

[This message has been edited by nx59650 (edited January 28, 2000).]


Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
Hobbes
 Homicidal Psycho Jungle Cat 
Member # 138

 - posted      Profile for Hobbes     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My opinion is that there is a lack of communications between deptments. Mike Okuda and his scenic art team made the MSD and DQ using NX-74913 while the CGI department that did the Prometheus itself didn't know the registry Okuda came up with and made up their own. Obvisiously they didn't understand the semi-chronological order of registries.

However let's assume it's older like the hull registry claims, the Prometheus was a top secret project, you think that when Starfleet named their Nebula-class ship USS Prometheus they'd say, "Hey, you can't name that ship Prometheus, we are already using it for our classified warship!" Yeah right. Odds are they'd just keep quiet.

------------------
"...and if frogs could fly; well we'd still have this problem, but wouldn't it be cool?" - Drew Carey
Federation Starship Datalink - Starship site of the new millennium.


Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged
Michael Dracon
aka: NightWing or Altair
Member # 4

 - posted      Profile for Michael Dracon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We've got ourselves another registry problem:

The Dauntless MSD says: NX-01 A
The Dauntless hull has: NX-01-A

But that aside: I like the 74913 better for the Prometheus. It suits the design better, and it higher than the Nebula Class Prometheus.

------------------
"Reality is a condition that occurs because of a lack of alcohol."
- Albert Einstein

(-=\V/=-)


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
AndrewR
Resident Nut-cache
Member # 44

 - posted      Profile for AndrewR     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Dauntless wasn't a starfleet ship and even if you say that oh they didn't go 'hang on' at the registry - they might have thought - oh its a new registry numbering scheme that they developed while we were gone... I think it was just a little ploy on the part of the alien to deceive the Voyager crew that they indeed had a brand new Starfleet ship in their hands.

Andrew

Also - I know this doesn't hold for 24th century ships - but in the Star Trek Sketchbook - Matt Jefferies said they used 1701 because the Enterprise was the 17th design and the 1st of its line (or second if you cound 00) This is screwed up when they used those earlier regos for other connie ships - but maybe they were 'tribute' ships - maybe there are lots of Tribute registries - its just that the Enterprise line of ships get the suffix.

------------------
"...it might be easier to study
ancient societies from distant orbit than it might be to sit next to the
Guardian of Forever with a tricorder." - Baloo, January 2000


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Aethelwer
Frank G
Member # 36

 - posted      Profile for Aethelwer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
BTW, the Dauntless hull registry never appeared in the show, IIRC.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
John Linnell: "This song is called...it's called..."
Audience: "Louisiana! Montana!"
John Linnell: Don't tell me what it's called..."


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
The359
The bitch is back
Member # 37

 - posted      Profile for The359     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, we did see pictures of the CGI Model later on, and it did say NX-01-A. But, as for the registry of NX-01A appearing on the MSD, well, think about this.

The MSD in Engineering onboard the Enterprise-D always had the registry number of NCC-1701D. But we know the registry was NCC-1701-D all the time. I think I've seen occasions where other computer graphics did the same thing.

------------------
"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


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
Aethelwer
Frank G
Member # 36

 - posted      Profile for Aethelwer     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah, OK...in that case, I suppose the -A works.

------------------
Frank's Home Page
John Linnell: "This song is called...it's called..."
Audience: "Louisiana! Montana!"
John Linnell: Don't tell me what it's called..."


Registered: Mar 1999  |  IP: Logged
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


© 1999-2024 Charles Capps

Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3