New Orleans-Class

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Bry_Sinclair, Jan 24, 2014.

  1. Mark_Nguyen

    Mark_Nguyen Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta
    I also believe it was a new shot, but with an eye on possibly re-using their elements in concert with other stock footage at some later time. That's why the Valkyrie was in the same-ish position as the earlier footage of the E-D towing the Stargazer, later seen as the Hathaway; and the Excalibur was in the same-ish position as the E-D flying in formation with the Zhukov the previous season. The Sutherland's component was also new in that it showed the starboard nacelle incomplete / under repair / damaged / whatever. Not sure if that would ever have been used again, and obviously none of this shot's components ever were.

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s5/5x01/redemptiontwo066.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x09/thebattle_hd_456.jpg

    http://tng.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/s4/4x11/datasday021.jpg

    They sorta did this with the stock footage of the Hood flying alongside and then peeling off from the E-D in "Encounter at Farpoint", combining it with the following season's shot of the Repulse simply flying in formation with the E-D (albeit on the other side of the ship) from "The Child". This leads to several awkward-looking sequences where an Excelsior class ship is flying alongside in one shot of some episode, and then in the next external shot she's apparently slipped over or under the Enterprise, recommenced parallel flight on the opposite side, and THEN veers off. Those always bugged me, but I understand why they'd try to re-use stock footage this way and hope only we nerds would be bugged by it. :P

    Mark
     
  2. Unicron

    Unicron Continuity Spackle Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Pyxis Unity
    Could the Valkryrie shots perhaps have been a reuse of the Hathaway shots from "Peak Performance"? IIRC, the Stargazer wasn't seen from the rear angles that were used for some of the Hathaway shots, it was only seen from either the front or side.
     
  3. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    The Constellation class ship wasn't the Valkyrie. IIRC, that name (and a change to one of the numbers of the registry) was put on the model after it had been shipped off to Planet Hollywood or some other such place as a display piece. If you squint, you can see that the registry number in the fleet shot is the Hathaway's.

    Neither the Stargazer nor the Hathaway were ever seen at that angle in motion.
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2014
  4. Unicron

    Unicron Continuity Spackle Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Location:
    The Pyxis Unity
    True. It's interesting how similar this shot looks to the link above of the blockade fleet, but of course the Hathaway was just stationary.
     
  5. Ar-Pharazon

    Ar-Pharazon Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2005
    If this image is legit, you can see both names.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. Dukhat

    Dukhat Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    ^Yep, it's legit. They just literally superimposed the Valkyrie label over the Hathaway's, which seems not to have come off all the way. They similarly superimposed a "0" over the "3" in the fourth number of the registry.