U.S.S. Curry - WTF?

Discussion in 'Trek Tech' started by Arpy, Dec 26, 2018.

  1. Dukhat

    Dukhat Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Here are the parts used to make the model:

    1. Excelsior saucer, unmodified.

    2. The three Excelsior neck pieces, glued together but placed midway/back on the secondary hull.

    3. Reliant impulse engines (would need to cut this off of the back of the Reliant model), placed behind the Excelsior back neck piece.

    4. Bottom half of the Reliant pylons (would need to cut them off of the rest of the pylons), placed on either side underneath the saucer.

    5. Excelsior secondary hull, possibly without the deflector dish piece.

    6. Excelsior shuttlebay, placed in front of the secondary hull.

    7. Excelsior tractor beam piece, placed underneath the shuttlebay.

    8. Enterprise-A shuttlecraft top piece, placed behind the Excelsior back neck piece.

    9. Enterprise-A shuttlecraft bottom piece, placed under the back of the secondary hull where the tractor beam piece normally goes.

    10. The back half of another Excelsior secondary hull, turned upside down and glued to the underside of the secondary hull.

    11. Two Reliant nacelles.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
    Albertese, blssdwlf and 137th Gebirg like this.
  2. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    Perhaps ships intended for deep space exploration have been fitted out with larger navigation deflectors because they don't know what they will be getting into, but ships intended for interior Federation use, or use in known space, don't need large dedicated navigation deflectors because they have enough maps to make it unneeded. The lower powered deflectors or smaller systems which would serve as backup deflectors on ships like the Constitution-class are standard on other ships in the region.
     
    Albertese likes this.
  3. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    If you (ever) build this, would you please post a link in this thread? I think many of us would like to see more clearly what the original looks like, even if some of us prefer variants of it. Thank you!
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
    137th Gebirg and blssdwlf like this.
  4. Allyn Gibson

    Allyn Gibson Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2000
    Location:
    South Pennsyltucky
    To me, the Curry is what happens when a Starfleet ship goes on a drunken bender in Tijuana. :)
     
  5. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    Wouldn't that be the USS Raging Queen?
     
    blssdwlf and Arpy like this.
  6. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    U.S.S. Yeager, ladies and gentlemen.

    That’s New Tijuana, one of the moons of Alpha Centauri VI
     
    Allyn Gibson likes this.
  7. 137th Gebirg

    137th Gebirg Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2000
    Location:
    PEBCAK! Three miles west of COVFEFE!
    Most of the DS9 frankenfleet appears to have been born of a bad acid trip. The Centaur is one of the better ones. It still has issues with scale, but is more aesthetically pleasing to the eye than the others, IMO.
     
    Allyn Gibson likes this.
  8. Dukhat

    Dukhat Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Sure. It’s actually 90% built already; I just need to add the Reliant impulse engines and the 2nd secondary hull part underneath and paint them. I bought custom decals for the ship as well.
     
    137th Gebirg and Albertese like this.
  9. Albertese

    Albertese Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    May 3, 2003
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    I'd love to see pictures!

    --Alex
     
  10. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    The Centaur’s biggest problem is the oversized torpedo pod doubling as a stardrive. That and the unfortunate tendency of modelers to add greebles to suggest technology!

    I kinda love the forward-facing shuttlebay on the top of the saucer though. They should have done that with the Nebula Class especially (flipping the Main Shuttlebay forward to avoid that aft sensor/torpedo tower), if they had the budget to.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
    137th Gebirg likes this.
  11. KamenRiderBlade

    KamenRiderBlade Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2012
    I concur, smooth & blended in like modern cars or Stealth Aircraft is the future where there are no obvious seams is where I believe design is going.

    Greeblies are a cheap and outdated way of doing things to make things look "High Tech"

    Function should have a nice form around it and every piece of the design needs to be thought out.
     
    Arpy likes this.
  12. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Sometimes "high tech" just isn't particularly desirable, though. And in this case, none of the ships were supposed to be new or modern. That is, creating something new and modern out of old kits would not have been a realistic expectation, and the end results were all labeled/registered as being old in the end.

    "Patched together" or "upgraded a dozen times" sound dramatically satisfactory for a fleet struggling to survive a bloody war, whether that was the intent for the people gluing these things together or not...

    I do wonder why the Curry and the Centaur got focus while, say, the Jupp did not. The level of detailing or quality of finish being equally low on all models, surely there'd be some value in immediate recognizability, and less so in weirdness?

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  13. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    It’s not just the Frankenfleet but the underside of the Constellation, ships like the Bozeman, and others. Also, all Starfleet ships are super high tech, never mind 1980’s greebles, and should probably look like something out of the Naboo fleet or something.

    The Centaur was in in prolonged battle with our heroes and the Curry was focused on in the opening shot of the sixth season, so both ships were spent more time on.
     
    137th Gebirg likes this.
  14. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    ...Which is the question, not the answer. Why were those specific two spent time on, rather than the Jupp or the Yeager, which don't mix "era-specific" components and ought to photograph at least equally well? Why didn't our heroes fight the Yeager and see the wounded Jupp tractored?

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  15. Dukhat

    Dukhat Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    The Centaur was focused on the most because it was the only kitbash that was scaled to be as small as the Jem’Hadar fighter it was in battle with. And the Curry was at the head of the ragtag fleet presumably because Dan Curry built it. Actually, the only kitbashes we see in “A Time to Stand” are the Curry, Centaur, Raging Queen (in the far background), and the tug.
     
    Timo likes this.
  16. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Scaling of the Centaur and many others would have been arbitrary, though - supposedly, the scale-establishing (if barely so) portholes were only painted on just prior to shooting, and details like the exact bridge shape were not seen in the final product. But yeah, I can see how the ships with the Voyager hull might have been too recognizable as "big", though...

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  17. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Why wouldn’t those two be focused on? They just needed two ships, regardless which. Both were later era (more of a match) than the E-A/Jupp and, as mentioned, scale-appropriate.

    I disagree that scaling is arbitrary. Identical hulls are usually identically scaled, regardless how shown on the tv screen. The big exception is the Bird of Prey, from the 80’s, when they movie model was relatively new to everyone and TNG’s model budget/abilities was more of an issue than say ENT’s.

    The Yeager and some of the others were not up to closer scrutiny. If not for the obviously non-Voyager secondary hull, they probably wouldn’t have used the Intrepid saucer for the same reason they didn’t the Constitution and Sovereign, and why we didn’t see Intrepids exploding left and right like Mirandas in the battle scenes, despite the CG model freely available.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
  18. Timo

    Timo Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    But the only thing making the Centaur "scale-appropriate" is the shooting team deciding so. Every ship with Excelsior bits could have been portrayed as being as small as Sisko's bugship, by the very same means that turned Centaur into such a midget, and by the very same token: because the Excelsior saucer does not establish scale of any sort.

    You can't argue the Centaur would be scale-appropriate, then, since she has the Excelsior saucer.

    Of course, ITRW, identical ship hulls are never identically scaled. Hulls come in all sizes but a limited number of shapes. Superstructures, likewise (but counting rows of portholes is already ruled out in the Trek case).

    Neither were the two ships that got filmed. They were simply made good enough just before or even during shooting, by painting on the portholes and choosing the lighting and shooting angles that best hid the lack of surface finish or presence of odd and objectionable finish.

    But Mirandas did explode left and right, despite having the Constitution saucer. There was no real danger of confusion. The Yeager would have been to Intrepid what Miranda was to Constitution, with the nacelles-down, big-butt configuration lacking a deflector but featuring extra gunbarrels.

    So it's no wonder they used the Yeager quite a bit in distant shots or their stock repeats. It's just a minor question mark why all the kitbashes weren't shot for the assorted ragtag fleet scenes at one point or another - and quite probably the only reason was that fleet scenes went full CGI pretty soon after the couple of kitbash eps.

    Timo Saloniemi
     
  19. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    Probably because the Yeager-class looks bad in closeups and has several bad angles for group shots.

    The Discovery era ships are more elegant (for the most part) than the majority of the season five/six kitbashes.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019
  20. Arpy

    Arpy Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Why’s that? It’s smaller than most ships, especially with no stardrive.

    I disagree completely. Identical models/parts are identical, regardless at what distance actually shown for artistic reasons. The only major case otherwise is the Kvort/Brel for the afore-mentioned reasons.

    They were considered the best of the lot? Certainly the Centaur is a fan-favorite, and the Curry is bigger/later-era than the Jupp, suggesting a greater threat/loss.

    Reliants exploding is not new, and the ship, like the Yeager, is difficult to confuse with a Constitution. Which, along with the Sovereign, Intepid, Defiants, and (if we must) Constitution should have been featured...studio execs...

    Except the Yeager was not an original well-crafted design like the Miranda and the biggest mismatch in Trek history?

    It would have been cool if they CG’d some of the Frankenfleet, revising some of its more questionable decisions, and including them in the battles. I mean, where’d all the pristine other ships come from, if things were so dire already?
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2019