Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by trekker670, May 21, 2013.
Aren’t those books just the magazine content?
Someone apparently saw the length was 415 meters and thought it was 415 feet.
And here's the part I've been waiting for: Chapter 5 - 32nd century.
PICTURE link: https://twitter.com/MarkoNolan/status/1430265933424209921
Crossfield class - USS Discovery-A NCC-1031 - 750/5 meters
Constitution class - USS Armstrong NCC-317856 / USS Excalibur NCC-1664-M / USS Noble NCC-325002 - 1399.82 meters
Friendship class - USS Thant NCC-325005 / USS Yang NCC-321616 / USS Yousafzai NCC-325010 - 1188.72 meters
Angelou class - USS Maathai NCC-325003 - 2109.43 meters
Intrepid class - USS Voyager NCC-74656-J - 452.95 meters
Mars class (called "Class unknown") - USS Liu Cixin NCC-325060 / USS Le Guin NCC-325059 / USS Zheng He NCC-325057 - 415.4 meters
Class unknown - USS Dresselhaus NCC-325019 / USS LaMar NCC-325015 / USS Pfau NCC-3250174 (!) - 654.76 meters
Merian class - USS Curie NCC-81890-J - 777.24 meters
Courage class ("Class unknown") - USS Jubayr NCC-325080 / USS Shogun NCC-325082 / USS Song NCC-325084 - 114.92 meters
Eisenberg class - USS Nog NCC-325070 / USS Grechko NCC-325071 / USS Cuyahoga NCC-325069 / USS Hansando NCC-325072 (written as "NCC-325002")
Saturn class ("Class unknown") - USS Annan NCC-325051 - 1041.32 meters
seed vault ship ("Tikhov type") - USS Tikhov NCC-1067-M - 51.3 meters
Crikes those registry numbers are mighty long!
Mike McMahan recently posted on twitter that the official length is 535m. Not sure where 794m comes from. Although I must admit she did look enourmous in that shot of their lower deck window from outside.
Eaglemoss' recent Kelvinverse ships all have incorrect sizes in the accompanying mini mags too all from EAS, which is quite open that it's Kelvin ship sizes are very different to the official ones. It's an annoying shame.
And probably mighty wrong, at least for the USS Pfau.
Yes, I suppose one of the digits is a typo. Even when writing down those here I mistyped extra digits into them (which I corrected when poof reading).
I like the look of the Maui. But if the second variant already doesn't get a wide release as a regular issue, I don't expect the third and fourth one to be made at all.
I was pleasantly surprised to see the two federation ships from Lower Decks in the book. Since these renders usually are quite similar to the model released. I am going to guess that the Cerritos is going to not look like its a cartoon, but closer in line to the rest of the collection.
And I just don't see how Eaglemoss is going to make 32nd century ships unless they use clear plastic connectors, and that a deal breaker for me.
The best solution for this is to have the entire ship encased in an acrylic globe or cube, with the appropriate gaps intact.
Glass or crystal would be better, but probably drive the cost up too high.
According to the Star Trek Online devs, CBS is very protective of preserving the art style of the Lower Decks designs, I'm surprised Hero Collector was able to do this.
We're pretty close to rounding out the Micro Machines we haven't had new versions of yet. If I did the de-duping right, that's the Caretaker Array and the Kazon Torpedo which need all new molds, the Kazon Fighter which is a simple modification of the Raider, and the NCC-7100 which is the yellow version of the Constellation-class that Picard has in his office.
There's also the proper Karemma ship, but Eaglemoss consider that one done, so we've never getting that.
Either that, or they have the parts separated but the stand will allow them to fit together and still be separated.
Eaglemoss doesn’t have the power to change the laws of physics. You’re not getting a model whose unconnected parts just hover in mid-air.
How about with magnets?
No, but there are legitimately three options. One clear plastic of some sort keeping the model all one piece. Two, using one stand with multiple arms to separate each part and maintain the proper placement of each segment. Three multiple stands that each hold a segment of the ships.
I think options 2 and 3 are doubtful. And for myself, especially since I currently don't really have any real attachment to the new ship designs, I personally won't get them if its option 1. By the same token I have always hated the marketing of cloaked vessels (which multiple companies have released over the decades. Just not my thing. Others of course will I am sure be perfectly happy with that form.
I actually like the idea of same form of stand that keeps the pieces where they belong. And I really hope I am wrong and they manage that. That I will be very interested in.
I wish Eaglemoss would produce glow in the dark Romulan Warbirds from TOS and Enterprise.
That is an interesting idea.
I ordered, and received today, two more models of the USS Armstrong NCC-1769 from the Kelvin timeline.
Why? The kitbashing of the Einstein-class USS Kelvin into other Starfleet classes we saw in production art published by Eaglemoss intrigues me.
So I removed the central nacelle* of one Armstrong, turning it into a Kelvinese Reliant class.
On the second, the pair of outer nacelles and the roll bar is gone. This mimics the Saladin-class USS Excelsior from the Designing Starships: The Kelvin Timeline book. What's cool is that this version of the Saladin also has the Armstrong's saucer cutouts at the rear.
Conveniently, all removed components snapped off easily, and hold in place when plugged back in. I could easily undo the "damage" if I applied glue. (For anyone who wants to try it out without buying additional models).
What I would REALLY like would be the USS Armstrong where the central nacelle is replaced by an Einsteinian secondary hull.
Pictures here (tweeted, can be viewed without account/login): https://twitter.com/MarkoNolan/status/1431220802318442502
Post in the Facebook fan group (account/login required): https://www.facebook.com/groups/eaglemossstartrekfangroup/posts/3031191347204188/
*Khan may call it the aft nacelle.
Is that the USS Armstrong magazine or an older magazine/book?
Separate names with a comma.