As you can see, there's a strange little pod/cannon thingy on the underside of the saucer. At first I thought the person who made the CGI was just taking a little artistic license, but that pod looked really familiar. I realized that it is actually from the underside of the Stargazer model:
And when I went back to look at the original photo of the two people holding the Princeton and Firebrand models, lo and behold, there it was the whole time staring me right in the face!
Look closely at the center of the saucer and you'll see it. It's actually pointed at an angle to the rest of the saucer, but it's there.
It's amazing that we can still find new info about these ships even after all this time
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I guess Jein was going for the Hermes/Saladin vibe with the deflector dish under the saucer. I'm still trying to figure out what the other little thing is under the nacelle. Either way, the Fact Files rendition is now pretty inaccurate.
On the subject of kitbashes, Eaglemoss is also releasing the Curry.
I'm curious to know if Eaglemoss has access to the original models, because it looks like there's the back end of the Excelsior's secondary hull sticking out of the back of the shuttlebay and upside down. This wasn't immediately apparent in the photos Dan Curry sent to me, but looking at them again, there seems to be something there. Hopefully there will be more renders in the future.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
That could be useful. We STILL don't know how the saucer attaches.
Are these things any good? Every picture of them I see looks like cheap plastic mass-produced toys with poor inaccurate colors & markings, yet people really buy them.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't collect the Eaglemoss ships; I collect Transformers. So I can't vouch for their construction.
As for the Curry, I'm almost positive that the saucer attaches to the secondary hull with the three neck pieces glued exactly the same way they'd be glued if you were just making the Excelsior normally, only instead of the neck being in back of the saucer and in front of the secondary hull, it's directly underneath the saucer and in the center of the secondary hull. I've been building my own replica of the Curry and my neck placement seems to match the Eaglemoss CGI.
-------------------- "A film made in 2008 isn't going to look like a TV series from 1966 if it wants to make any money. As long as the characters act the same way, and the spirit of the story remains the same then it's "real" Star Trek. Everything else is window dressing." -StCoop
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I would like that post if this was a media with likes.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
