posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim:
The thing is, while FJ's depiction of the Connie is inaccurate to the model, the Hermes, Saladin, Ptolemy, and Federation have no model to be inconsistent with.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
What do you mean, no model? They're made of Constitution parts. Ergo, they use the same design.

The last time I checked, the Nebula Class used the exact same phaser types, windows, and just about all the same features as the Enterprise-D model.

Now, the Saladin, Federation, and Ptolemy are all made of Constitution parts, then that means that they've got the same outfit styles... It would be highly illogical to say that the little dots that represent phaser banks aren't really there on the Constitution Class, but they ARE there on the Federation and the others.

It's a little principle called Occam's Razor. The simplest answer is most likely the correct one. We KNOW that the FJ details of the Constitution Class are inaccurate. Therefore, it stands to reason that the details on the other ships are inaccurate as well -- by that I mean that they have similar arrangements as the Constitution.

---

I must disagree. Whether or not the Connie has these details has no effect on whether the other ships do. There's no logic in excluding them simply for the purpose of making them identical to the Connie. They're unique ships, and even if you want to call them Connie kitbashes, there's no reason why their parts couldn't have been MODIFIED by Starfleet. They needn't be simply cut and pasted from the Connie. (Harry, I use that phrase figuratively, and by no means am implying that you drawings are cut and pasted.)

And, just to additionally clarify one of your statements, we KNOW that the FJ details of the Connie are inaccurate to particular VERSION of the ship, one of several known, which was seen in TOS. *His* version was also seen---as computer displays in later films/episodes.

-MMoM

--------------------
The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
The only major differences: The Federation's saucer is made up of two lower halves of the Constitution saucer, and has a different secondary hull. The nacelles are still the same size, though.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:

The last time I checked, the Nebula Class used the exact same phaser types, windows, and just about all the same features as the Enterprise-D model.

---

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Timo:
And even the original source of the FJ ship, namely his manual, insists that the "Constitution class" (or Class IX Heavy Cruiser) starships were produced in several time-separated batches. So it's not at all objectionable IMHO to take this as an implicit permission to treat FJ's NCC-1700 as a "variant" instead of a "poor representation of the original".

---

Exactly. Even if the fandom interpretations of the variant/refit/subclass sequence from Ships of the Star Fleet, etc, aren't the precise way it really happened, it's obvious that there was some kind of progressive variation in the design of the Constitution class. This much is clearly evident from onscreen evidence.

Think about it: If there were three different versions ("The Cage," "Where No Man Has Gone Before," and the rest of the show) of the Connie in the time leading up to TOS, and there were later several major refit-configurations (TMP, TNG Brahms' desktop ship, and the DS9 TM ship) then why couldn't Joseph's version (or versions, considering the drawings in the Manual and his NCC-1700 blueprints are slightly different) fit in as well. After all, it too was seen onscreen in both the movies (TMP and TSFS) and in TNG. ("Datalore")

-FtK

P.S.

How about my new handle?

[ August 27, 2002, 12:01: Message edited by: Felix the Kzin ]

--------------------
The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.

posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Timo:
And even the original source of the FJ ship, namely his manual, insists that the "Constitution class" (or Class IX Heavy Cruiser) starships were produced in several time-separated batches. So it's not at all objectionable IMHO to take this as an implicit permission to treat FJ's NCC-1700 as a "variant" instead of a "poor representation of the original".

---

Oh god, here we go with the "variants of the Constitution Class" again... (Sorry, it's a pet peeve of mine.)

I believe that there were, at most, two versions of the TOS-era Constitution. The TMP-refit would be the third. I don't pretend to be an expert on all of the various details of the TOS Enterprise, but I'm observant enough to know that we've seen different features on the same part of the ship in the SAME EPISODE, depending on which shot was (re)used. For example, there were the "vents" on the ends of the nacelles, that also were white balls depending on which shot was used. And I specifically recall noticing the larger deflector dish in some of the "regular" TOS episodes. (I can't give specific episodes though, sorry. My only source for TOS right now is the Sci-Fi Channel.)

I know that there were a large number of changes in the Enterprise model between "The Cage" and the other episodes. They shrank the bridge module into a smaller bulge, shrank the deflector dish (perhaps after "Where No Man Has Gone Before") and they added the white balls to the warp nacelles (also maybe after "WNMHGB").

There's also the line from "The Cage" which stated that the Enterprise's crew complement in 2254 was 203 -- a whole lot smaller than the 430 from the "regular" series. My conclusion is that there was a refit at the end of Pike's five-year mission(s), which gave the Enterprise (and perhaps the entire Constitution Class) a semi-major upgrade. Heck, we know from the TNG:TM that starships are on a regular refit cycle -- ten to twenty years. If the 1701 was launched in 2245, then a refit of 2264 or so (just before Kirk's five-year mission) would fit in perfectly.

But everyone has to remember that just about ALL of the effects shots in TOS were reused whenever possible. Therefore, it's problematic at best to try to apply various "variants" to the basic (TOS-era) Constitution Class design. (Heck, they came up with a relatively lame excuse about Romulans using Klingon ships just so they could re-use the D7 model one more time!) In fact, I'm pretty sure that the big deflector dish from the original version of the model was seen in throughout the TOS run, in the form of the effects shots in the opening credits sequence. Or at least through the first and second season.

See, the problem in my mind is that "Star Trek" is still a TV show, no matter how much we try to develop its background and characters. It's fine to try to develop rationalizations and explanations, but at some point you've got to consider the fact that this was a 1960's-era TV show that basically pioneered the modern space opera genre for television. Furthermore, you have to remember that TOS was filmed under a very tight budget, and often under the threat of cancellation. And most especially, the creators had no idea that their work would spawn a multi-billion-dollar franchise, five sequel series, ten movies, and fans like us who would perpetually analyze, discuss, and deconstruct the tiniest details regarding the arrangement of equipment on a studio model.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, there's a point where trying to rationalize things is pointless. But I guess that's an IMO.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Woodside Kid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by MinutiaeMan:
The only major differences: The Federation's saucer is made up of two lower halves of the Constitution saucer, and has a different secondary hull. The nacelles are still the same size, though.

---

You must have a different copy of the Manual than I do, then. In the one I have, the lower half of the Constitution saucer (and, therefore, Hermes, Saladin, and Ptolemy) is a single curve, concave up towards the rim. Not so for the Federation. Its saucer has a two-part curve; the outer portion is concave away from the rim, while the inner portion is concave towards it. Aside from the engines, the only part you really can claim is copied directly from the Connie is the dorsal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Mike Who Would Be Captain:
how do you know theyre the same phaser types and whatnot.. did Okuda and Sternbach publish a Nebula-class technical manual that i missed or are you just assuming they are the same because they look similar?

For all we know the internal arrangement features are completely divergent from the Galaxy. this would be necessitated by the fact the a Nebula in real life isnt a kitbash, but built independantly using only parts of the same spaceframe. i can almost definitely see them requiring a lot of different interior tech than the Galaxy based on the fact they have less room and a different mission profile.[/QB]

---

You're right about the Nebula needing different configurations. However, my reasoning is that they've got a ton of space on that ship, and so they had the room to fit the Type 10 arrays. (Besides, the DS9:TM says Type 10 emitters, too.) I figured that if the saucer is essentially the same, and the phasers have an identical look, then they're probably of the same type.

Of course that's not proof in and of itself, so thanks for mentioning that.

--------------------
“Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov
Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha