posted
TSN: Are you saying that Sternbach should have followed the most simple and likely answer and decided they were new ships? Or are you saying we should ignore Sternbach's written statement that they are melds of reclaimed hulls and then, ignoring that fact, decide the most simple answer is that they are new ships?
I'll have to go off on three or four tangents of "but if you're saying . . ." with their three or four different rebuttals if I don't find out now.
Also, we only have proof that a Captain Reynolds was in Operation Return. We don't have any proof Captain Charlie Reynolds of the U.S.S. Centaur was even at the battle. For all we know, Centaur might have still been running from Jem'Hadar when this episode took place. There may only have been Captain Barbara Reynolds of the U.S.S. Polynesia, so Sisko might only have been able to address this on Reynolds.
posted
Having spent the last hour or so trying to disprove my own arguments and side, I've come up with some information for your point of view.
I let one important piece of information slip my mind.
The DS9TM specifically says EXCELSIOR/CONSTITUTION-CLASS STARSHIP VARIANT, so I can't have my different classes without saying almost what you're saying above: discount the manual. So, as far as that information goes, we will, as you said, have to rearrange the internal contents of these vessels. Since the Excelsior/Constitution are specifically mentioned, we must also look at the fact that the parts are out of scale to each other, so they do not fit the comparible sizes for these two ships. This ship can't have a Constitution nacelle because the nacelle is too big compared to the Exclesior body; the ship on page 157 can't be a Constitution variant because it is too large; a Constitution without a body (in that arrangement) cannot be larger than a Constitution with a body (in it's usual arrangement), etc. . . .
Hmm, answers. First, I'm assuming the Curry is made up thusly: Excelsior saucer, custom assembly of some sort connecting the saucer and secondary hull, Excelsior secondary hull, custom assembly holding the Constitution nacelles.
The internal configuration problem isn't as bad as anyone might think. Transporters can beam out the habitat modules until the saucer is just a shell, but it doesn't have to do so. Transport of enough modules to allow a new warp core to be put in and allow power transfer conduits to be run through the saucer are all that is needed. If we didn't have transporters and habitat modules loosely secured to vessels, this type of modification would be a problem.
As far as size comparisons go, yes we may have to say someone made a mistake. But as far as the simplest answer being the most likely, which is more likely, that a couple of numbers and size comparisons are going to change to fit the idea behind the construction of these vessels (our steady volume of complaints hold that these things change more often than we'd like), or that the idea is going to change to fit a number of internally inconsistent numbers and ships. It's much more plausible that F/X people, and Doug Drexler modified parts to look better when rearranged than it is to say Sternbach's idea of the construction of the ships is flawed. Drexler and the F/X people were taking the artistic approach, not the technical approach. People largely agree that there is only one NX-74205, yet it changes size on a regular basis.
The modifications seem possible to me; the only problems (those being size) can be explained away without being too extreme, so I see no problem with these ships being yard bashes, and if the origin of these ships are ever mentioned in the show, they will be described as yard bashes of different ships, because people think the idea is "neat"--that is people unlike us who see every technical flaw.
posted
Sirmaniac: I agree with your latest theory for the Curry, this is what I always believed the *real* Curry (not the image in the DS9TM) was asssembled. However, I still don't believe it's a singular design, just built from some scrap only to have one more ship.
"It's much more plausible that F/X people, and Doug Drexler modified parts to look better when rearranged than it is to say Sternbach's idea of the construction of the ships is flawed."
posted
Well, I just did a bit of calculating, and perhaps the Curry's nacelles were normal Miranda size. But the Centaur definitely had a scaled-up rollbar for its sec. hull/pylons...
------------------ "I fart in your general direction!" -John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
posted
Good, I was hoping no one would try to "rip me a new one."
Sorry Bernd, I meant Dan Curry--not Doug Drexler. In the initial construction of the ships for the episode, artistic license ruled over technical accuracy, hence the out-of-scale parts. The F/X people said "Sure, the nacelle is supposed to be this long, but it would look better if we extended it to this length.
Thanks TSN for looking over the Curry again (I know I'm keeping the Manual right here beside me for reference, hopefully fewer mistakes this way. Looking at the Manual, the Centaur's information only says EXCELSIOR-CLASS STARSHIP VARIANT. Thanks to the fact Miranda wasn't mentioned, Centaur's roll bar may be a custom assembly or from another class.
I've been trying to support my opinion (for it is an opinion, nothing more, and I feel the Technical Consultant and author of the TNGTM deserves an advocate) without too much extra, so I came up with an entirely different argument (yes, I'm a tad anal, but I am just trying to answer the question to the best of my ability).
It is higly unlikely the Wambundu-class starship (or any other class metioned above) will ever be matched with a picture, so fan designers whip out your pencils and start drawing. However, it's highly LIKELY that the Centaur will be included in the updated Trade Paper Back Encyclopedia that will come out as early as May. Since Okuda only has to come up with a class (given the Technical Manual's explanation, he is most likely to say *Centaur), it's a good bet he will inlcude some class label (unless he doesn't give us class and registry information for the new, Sixth- and Seventh-season ships, then we rip him a new one), but he will keep in mind the Technical Manual. So, as recently as May, we will probably have to go out of our way to take the class designation away from a "non-canon" starship if we want to name it "Wambundu" instead. So, even if the Encyclopedia doesn't reference the yard bash thing (our biggest disagreement), Okuda will still think of this explanation when he names the ship's class, so the name won't match any class we've seen previously.
* Yes, regarding the naming of these yard bashes, the Manual says "Some temporary designations for surviving vessels have passed through the formal review process since the operation and may be added to the official ship inventory." Given the above, and the fact that Centaur was probably the only ship with that arrangement, it will probably have Centaur-class attached to it.
If you ask me, Sternbach was writing this book so soon after the episodes were aired, the producers hadn't given the okay to class designations and registries. Sternbach looked at some obvious kitbashes, and worked a theory about reclaimed hulls.
Anyway, I'm probably done now. I doubt I'll do any more on this thread than lurk to see people tie it up.
posted
Someone should tell Okuda that he should ignore the TM's "yard bash" theory, and give the Centaur and Curry a couple of the as-yet-unclaimed class names...
------------------ "I fart in your general direction!" -John Cleese, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
posted
Just so my information is correct, I visited the Pocket Books website, and the Encyclopedia update has been moved from a May release to an October release.
IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
