View Single Post
Old November 5 2012, 12:26 PM   #14
Re: Timo's Hobbyist's Guide to the UFP Starfleet

It's about 90% wishful thinking. Some of the captions are for images that do exist, but usually with a nasty twist to what they are supposed to represent. Say, when I merge the Daedalus class with the Horizon of Spaceflight Chronology fame, I see no reason to dismiss the illustration from pp. 92-93. I just think that's how a neo-cubist would see the familiar sphere-and-cylinder vessel.

Dick Mandel did the opposite with his chronology, wrapping the captions around existing images, sometimes from wholly different representatives of the genre. I do that a bit, too - see the old Jeffries shuttlecraft, say.

Basically, none of the pics match the captions yet, except perhaps by happy coincidence. The pics are there mainly to give an idea of what already depicted ship the text is referring to.

Timo, do you have the latest version condensed into a rar / zip file for easy downloading off of 1 site?
That's the problem with constant tinkering: I seldom have the patience to wrap the results that way. Have patience, I'll zip it some time this week again.

Just curious, why I can't find Sisko's Defiant there.... (maybe it just slips from my eyes)
I've divided the ships in three major categories: big "actual" ships, smaller "coastal" types, and very small "craft". And Sisko's ship is small enough to be bumped down from the category of "real" starships to Part II where I also list other escort class vessels, corvettes and whatnot. That's where the Saber class goes, too, on account of being equally diminutive. So, the third pdf, the first half...

and why Nebula and Akira are older than Galaxy Class?
On account of their registries: the lowest known Nebula ones are lower than the lowest known Galaxy ones. Also, on account of the "nacelles down" ship being more numerous than the "nacelles up" one. I see the Nebula as the basic model which was then taken to luxurious extremes by adding the fancy saucer separation functionality and other bells and whistles. Only a few of the luxury model would be built, as opposed to the barebones design, and the luxury version would only be created after the basic model proved the concept.

Akira has low registries, too. And it looks sufficiently like a member of the family, with the same nearly round saucer, similarly bulging ramscoops and whatnot.

There are few exceptions to the rule of low registry meaning an old ship type in the Guide, at least in the 24th century. Oh, I have played a trick or two with FASA registries there, but canon ones (even for barely glimpsed kitbashes) tend to be treated as sacrosanct and "chronologically revealing".

Timo Saloniemi
Timo is offline   Reply With Quote