posted
But, of course (opening this can of worms again for the kazillionth time... ) when they filmed BOBW2, they used a (kind of proto-) Nebula-class model, quite visible in several scenes from different angles, marked as USS Melbourne NCC-62043. This doesn't really create a problem, because according to the VERY logical argument posted above, and what was supported by the dialogue and Encyclopedia, the Melbourne is an Excelsior-class ship. The registry is even visible if you freeze-frame the DS9 premiere. 62043 really DOES fit a Nebula a lot better than an Excelsior though... Anyway, I agree with you, just making a point.
IP: Logged
posted
My earlier comments on other fori notwithstanding, I think the Springfield photo indeed shows a secondary hull for the vessel. No, not that bloated thing that hangs below the ship like the gondola of an airship - I still think it's just part of the pedestal. But above the gondola and below the actual saucer, there seems to be a flat structure that begins at the aft end of the saucer (and flares smoothly to the dorsal aft hull part with an Enterprise-style "undercut") and extends forward to below the exact centerpoint of the saucer (where the image fades).
This sort of ventral hull could house a navigational deflector in front, thus making for one less TNG-era ship that would lack the ah so vital deflector. And this relatively shallow ventral hull would be consistent with the other Springfield image, and would in fact help explain the slight nose-up attitude of the ship in that image.
If (if!) the Springfield really has this sort of a ventral hull, then there's the very real possibility that the Cheyenne, a starship by the same manufacturer, would also have a similarly small ventral addition, complete with a nav deflector...
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
Well, there's no doubt that the Challenger shot IS that class; I'd recognize that triple-damned Typhoon sail anywhere. Now if we could figure out what the ventral pylon was made from.
I think I see what Timo's talking about....it's a slight bump, barely distiguishable, but it couls also be because of the poor grayscaled photnegativity of the image.
Although I MUST admit, the "bloated gondola" hull concept is a WICKED idea....
------------------ "What if, the next time someone tried to pull up a dandelion, it pulled back? What if the dandelion ducked under the blades of the lawnmower?" --Del
posted
Well, when I first looked at the Springfield ship - I though hmmmm... nacelle and pod? Then I saw it... no - its a close nacelle and a far nacelle - and very high above presumably the plane of the saucer... yeah, I too see that sort of secondary hull part.
I thought I'd maybe add my 2c worth, incase anyone wasn't seeing what I was seeing!?!
Andrew
------------------ "I threw bitter tears at the ocean But all that came back was the tide..." 'I Will Not Forget You' Sarah McLachlan
posted
I don't check this thread very often, but I have a little to chip in:
The Encyclopedia (I think. Some reputable source, at least) says that the reason the model was changed was because the Excelsior model was far more detailed, and thus better suited to a close-up.
The registry number of USS Melbourne is smack in the middle of a bunch of Nebula Class ships, and far higher than any other Excelsior Class seen. Regardless of which numbering system you think Starfleet uses, this would seem to suggest that they stopped making Excelsiors long before the Melbourne was built.
For these reasons, I have decided that the Encyclopedia is wrong, and that DS9 "Emissary" has an on-screen error, and that the Melbourne was a Nebula Class vessel.
------------------ You're a Starfleet Officer. "Weird" is part of the job.
posted
Oh, I forgot that. Thanks to Gary Perry for sending me the pictures, and thanks to Federation Models from where he got them, and thanks to whoever took the photos in the first place.
------------------ "Species 5618, human. Warp-capable, origin grid 325, physiology inefficient, below average cranium capacity, minimum redundant systems, limited regenerative abilities." Ex Astris Scientia
posted
Okay, just when everybody thought we had finally mined the subject dry, Dukhat seems to have hit paydirt again! Lest this thread be prematurely terminated after only eight pages, I felt obligated to mention the find here, even though Dukhat has a separate thread for it, too ("There were two Melbournes at Wolf 359!").
Okay, everybody, place your picture of the Nebula study model from "BoBW" on your screen (you know, the one where the ship is in the middle of the E-D viewscreen). Now place the picture of the mystery ship next to the exploding USS Saratoga in "Emissary" there, too. Flip the latter 90 degrees clockwise. Kick yourself savagely on appropriate body parts for not seeing this before Dukhat did.
At least I am totally convinced Dukhat is right here. The damage patterns seem identical. The only discrepancy is that I can't see the main port nacelle in the "Emissary" picture, even though it is in place in the "BoBW" pics. There's only this small white blob instead of an entire nacelle in the "Emissary" view. Or is there more if you are watching with better equipment than mine?
posted
You know, this might be a bit off topic, so please don't shoot me (or do for resurrecting such an old - long! - thread), but Shelby's comment about rebuilding the fleet after this conflict ... the Dominion War kinda laughs at that. 40 ships to rebuild the fleet? Or one year to build 40 ships? Just curious.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 6.83 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux *** "Oh, yes, screw logic, let's go for a theory with no evidence!" -Forum Member Who Shall Be Nameless. 11:48am, Jan. 19th, 2001
Jim Phelps
watches Voyager AFTER 51030
Member # 102
posted
According to set descriptions in the BOBW script, Admiral Hanson was supposed to be on an unspecified Galaxy-class vessel when communicating with the Enterprise to promote Riker and such. The writer specified the class so that the set designers would know which ready room sets to use in the background.
posted
I suppose, since Starfleet lost 40+ ships in wolf359, 40 ships would be enough to fill THAT gap. Some of them they prolly wanted to get rid of anyway...
------------------ Here lies a toppled god, His fall was not a small one. We did but build his pedestal, A narrow and a tall one.
posted
Send that old Constitution junk, and a few of those old Mirandas, this is a good time to thin the fleet...
------------------ "One's ethics are determined by what we do when no one is looking" Nugget Star Trek: Gamma Quadrant Star Trek: Legacy Read them, rate them, got money, film them
"...and I remain on the far side of crazy, I remain the mortal enemy of man, no hundred dollar cure will save me..." WoV
Topic Closed
) when they filmed BOBW2, they used a (kind of proto-) Nebula-class model, quite visible in several scenes from different angles, marked as USS Melbourne NCC-62043. This doesn't really create a problem, because according to the VERY logical argument posted above, and what was supported by the dialogue and Encyclopedia, the Melbourne is an Excelsior-class ship. The registry is even visible if you freeze-frame the DS9 premiere. 62043 really DOES fit a Nebula a lot better than an Excelsior though... 
Anyway, I agree with you, just making a point.
Printer-friendly view of this topic