posted
When did the nebula class ship in message in a bottle get a name like USS Bogue? Is this an official name? It is not in the encyclopedia version 3 or in the episode.
------------------ "We set sail on this new sea because their is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won" John F Kennedy
posted
The Bogue was from the Ships of the Line calender which apparently used several CGI models from the show, so it probably is canon, just not definate
------------------ "Homer, you're dumb as a mule and twice as ugly, if a strange man offers you a ride, I say take it"-Abe S.
posted
The encyclopedia, and the variants, don't list all ships. Look at the first encyclopedia, end of ship list. There is an entry that says that the list doesn't have every ship known by name or registry mentioned or seen in Star Trek. The reason is unknown to me, and strangely this entry is missing from later editions.
posted
Thanks for clearing up the aft phaser issue. So now we know the Bogue and the Leeds aren't 100% identical at least. What about the window rows, though? Anybody have a picture of the Leeds showing extra windows? I mean, if the Leeds is the model used for filming the DS9 opening credits, then isn't she probably also the ship seen at the end of "Sacrifice of Angels" hovering near the newly retaken DS9? That ship doesn't seem to have any more windows than the Phoenix, Sutherland and Farragut versions of the ship did.
Also, the aft torpedo tubes need not be angled - the muzzles simply are cut into tilted parts of the hull surface, for whatever mysterious reason. At least the two tubes at the centerline can't be angled the way their muzzles are, or they would intersect each other just inside the module outer hull.
posted
Timo, that shot with the Neb and the newly retaken station is actually a stock footage shot from The Way of the Warrior I think.
Also, I assume that the impulse engines being behind a 'grey panel' is something the Defiant uses as well - seeing as though the impulse engines are supposed to be at the very aft of the ship.
Andrew
------------------ "Neil says hi by the way" - Tear In Your Hand, Tori Amos
posted
"Way of the Warrior" didn't have any Nebulas - it had the scene with USS Venture on an upper pylon, two Excelsiors flying by in the background, and a Miranda docking to the main docking ring on the left. The "SoA" shot must be a customized one - but there is of course nothing to say that the Nebula image there couldn't be older stock footage inserted on newer custom material.
Interestingly, the Akiras also seem to have these "covered" impulse engines on the saucer - except the covers are brightly colored (purple in the prints, but a light color in the real CGI model as well), and the rim has a clearly visible grille that glows in flight.
posted
Regarding Nebula-Class impulse engines, Star Trek Mechanics contains several photos of the Farragut studio model. One photo (page 89 for anyone with the book) has a full shot of the rear of the model. Just over the horizontal warp engine pylon on both sides is a small square slightly protruding grill, obviously designed to exhaust something. They bear a passing resemblance to the impulse exhausts on the Voyager. At first glance they seem a bit too small for so large a vessel, but perhaps not. The darker "filled-in" sections on the primary hull are definately not impulse engines.
This wouldn't be the first time impulse engines were overlooked in the design of a starship. Someone tell me where the impulse engines are on the Stargazer. Directly aft of the warp deflection crystal on both sides? Nope! In no scene is there any evidence of impulse engines.
How about the mammoth Romulan Warbird? I don't remember any impulse engines there, either. Here's a question: How do starships reverse? Surely something more powerful than thrusters are needed to stop a ship traveling at impulse speeds.
Then there is the Enterprise B. Two HUGE impulse engines exhaust almost directly against the front of the warp engines. Who thought this was a good idea? Some people try to make these into hangar bays in an attempt to ignore such a ridiculous design flaw.
posted
The grilles on the Farragut version (and apparently on the Sutherland version as well, according to photos in "The Continuing Mission") would be good candidates for impulse engines. It's too bad they do not glow in flight.
Did you say there were dark, filled-in areas in the Farragut as well, similar to those in the Leeds and the CGI model?
The Stargazer impulse engines probably ARE right aft of the crystals - they simply do not glow when on idle. Note that the crystals themselves do not have the usual blue glow, neither are the torpedo tubes painted or lit the usual way. This could be because the two Constellations we observed up close, the Stargazer and the Hathaway, were both derelicts and some of their systems were inactive. Of course, there's a supposedly active Constellation seen from aft in "Redemption" that also lacks the impulse and crystal glow...
Also note that the impulse engines of Kirk's old Enterprise did not glow before the refit - not even when the dialogue stated that the ship was struggling at full impulse against an alien force, and we got a close-up from behind. So it is well established that the glow is somewhat superfluous to the operation of the drive.
Romulans are big on stealth. If non-glowing impulse engines are possible at all, Romulans would be the ones to utilize them. The bright glow of the Galaxy engines could be comparable to the fact that Galaxies do not have cloaks.
No comment on the odd E-B.
All in all, I would say that impulse engines need not glow - BUT it would be nice to have some sort of grillwork or identifiable nozzles on every ship to indicate that at least the modelmakers realized the ship should HAVE impulse engines.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
