Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C - CLOSED - DO NOT RESTART TOPIC

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Yeah, this "self-appointed high priest of a religious sect" is henceforth just going to ignore Mr. Comsol's further ranting and raving.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Time to close this thread. Turned into a thread slinging insults at each other.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Thanks for the recommendation. And I hope people get a chuckle or two when they read the inevitable aftermath of the Battle of Narendra III (had a few good laughs myself writing it).

Bob

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Pity none of it matters, but there you go.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

What, Star Trek? strange thing to post in a Star Trek forum, but IDIC all the way my friend...

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Someone modeled the ship in 3D. You wouldn't see the ship out the windows unless you were right up against the glass and looking down, which the camera never was.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

You definitely should have on the Enterprise-E. Click!

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

I'll 1-up you: (picture courtesy of IRML)

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Ooh really? I'd love to see some of those images, if you can remember where they are. Images such as this one seem to be crying out for some part of the saucer visible in the middle distance. I'm pretty certain there are other shots where the camera looked down on the windows as well, but TNG is not really my best field. Having said that, the theory in general is one that's been knocking around in my head for while, so I am happy to be proved wrong here.

Great picks of the Enterprise-E guys, thanks!

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

It was me, here's a wireframe from sketchup, you can see that the nacelles are far lower than you'd expect;



you may possibly of been able to see the top of the main shuttlebay depending on camera angle, but for the most part im willing to let that slide.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Thanks for posting this, it's interesting how little of the saucer is actually visible (presumably due to the slope of the hull). If I read your wireframe correctly the top of the shuttlebay doors comes up about a third of the way up the left window, is that right?

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

I think that's what Mytran was getting at (note he doesn't mention warp nacelles only the saucer) and that you confirmed. You should be able to see the top of the saucer and/or main shuttlebay unless the camera was zoomed in or positioned low and aimed up to avoid bringing the saucer into the field of view.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

If they had a different design of Enterprise C in the Parallel time line, it stands to reason they'd have had a different Enterprise D too - the technology would follow that different path. But despite being built for very different requirements, externally at least the ship was the same. But there's no reason to suppose history had flowed differently before that, during the Ambassador class' construction.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

FWIW, I think the Enterprise-D should have changed in external appearance as well - it still looks like the floating hotel it was originally designed to be! Do all those pretty windows really make for an efficient warship?

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Actually, there should have been all kinds of differences. In a timeline where there had been 20 years of war with the Klingons and the Feds are losing, not only would the Enterprise-D have looked completely different (and would have been built under completely different circumstances and at a completely different time), but there's no way in hell that Riker, Geordi and Data would still have been serving with Picard. These are top-of-the-line officers, and they all would have had their own commands by that time. And why would Guinan have even been there? The Enterprise-D was supposed to be a warship! What point would a civilian bartender (or any civilian personnel) serve on a military vessel in wartime? The answer of course, is that they're all there and the Enterprise looks the same because it's a fictional show that isn't based in any kind of reality at least as far as this alternate history is concerned. That's why it's so futile to try to make any kind of sense of it just to justify incredibly minor things.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

That's a fairly long list of "incredibly minor things" you've given! At least Troi was absent from the bridge in this timeline

However, there is at least a precedent set for having our regular group of characters appear in wildly irregular surroundings - the TOS Episode "Mirror Mirror". Logically, there's no way that should appear as is, either!

I guess, sometimes the universe is just massively coincidental like that.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

You're absolutely right, but there appeared to be subtle differences in personality in the alternate timeline. Picard and Riker, for example, didn't appear to get along well.

My point being that maybe these officers weren't top-of-the-line and considered deserving of their own commands in a war-time setting.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Pretty sure that image or angle never appeared in the series.

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

Thanks for bringing this up. I believe even in the alternate universe of "Yesterday's Enterprise" lagging behind ours, the war effort would speed up the development of military designs at the expense of civilian ones and scientific vessels, so the arrival of the Galaxy Battleship Class could have happened at the same time as ours.

As an analogy we may take a look at our history where until the 1940's we still had plenty of biplanes and within only a few years the first jet planes arrived. War apparently speeds up those developments.

I don't see the point why the design of the Galaxy Battleship Class should be significantly different.

Instead of families residing in the saucer, we have, according to Tasha Yar "Forty two decks. Capable of transporting over six thousand troops."

Since the Battleship Enterprise-D functions as a troop transporter (saucer separation to land and deploy troops?), I see little reason why the design should be significantly different from the Starship Enterprise-D.

I had failed earlier to notice (and mention) that we did have solid evidence that "Redemption II" relocated events featured in "Yesterday's Enterprise" into a parallel or alternate universe. Here is my latest post in the TNG thread that wraps it up: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?p=9342559#post9342559

So while the "real" look of the Enterprise-C in the alternate "universe at war" is known, the "real" look of the Enterprise-C in our universe is (or more correctly) became conjectural when "Redemption II" aired.

Nevertheless, the conference lounge wall of the Enterprise-D provides the clear answer how the "real" Enterprise-C from our universe, before it was displaced into the future, must have looked like and it happens to be the Probert design.

Bob

 

Re: Probert's REAL N.C.C.-1701-C

My "incredibly minor things" statement was not referring to the things I wrote in my post.

Exactly. The only way that "Mirror Mirror" could have logically worked the way it did was if the Federation turned evil almost overnight. The fundamental differences between the two universes (and how long those differences have lasted), would have made the mirror universe almost unrecognizable.

Well, no, like I said, it was that way for a reason. Just not any kind of logical, realistic reason.

Whether they got along or not was irrelevant. Riker was a full commander in Starfleet. There's no way he wouldn't have had his own command by then.