I suspect part of the reason they didn’t update the FX shots in the TNG-R is simply because it was already an expensive undertaking and unlike TOS, the ships held up resolution-wise. They would have redone TOS either. Again, with new FX ever becoming more less expensive, I think it’s just a matter of time. Heck, even keeping every last ship in every last (reused) shot, I’d still want shield bubbles, battle damage, more shots fired…each ship maneuvering more realistically, still further apart, and plain old higher resolution on each ship…there’s a tactile verisimilitude to the look of Discovery that you don’t get in some old Hideki or what have you, never mind looking into the windows. Plus, they can all be lit better, both more realistically and prettier — Every. Last. Ship. But it would be a labor of love. And fantasy. Which is what this is all about.
Again, the VFX replacement in TOS wasn’t just about the resolution, but also giving television viewers something they hadn’t seen before, an actual special edition. You can listen to Dave Rossi explaining the whole background here.
Exactly. I don't even see DS9 getting an HD remaster anytime soon, much less that they will redo the CGI fleet shots the way I've described them. They would most likely just slavishly copy what was done before and not bother changing out old designs for new ones. But the topic of this thread is 'What ships should they have used in the Dominion War,' so that's what we're talking about
I really did not mean to suggest that you were disrespecting anyone, as your post show how much you care for the original work, and are just imaging beyond it. Much of what you have said on this thread about what those battles ultimately SHOULD have looked like is also correct in my view. I was simply lamenting the fact that it would likely not happen because the original artists probably would not be behind it. Or worse...it would be done anyway, even though the original artists opposed it. I don't want to put words in their mouths though. Maybe they would actually love to redo the DS9 battles and put more into them. Maybe Curry would love to get the chance to make sure that his Merced-class gets confirmed onscreen time...maybe not In any case, I would be curious to hear what Curry, Drexler, Bruckner, and so on would have done with more time and tech. It's fun to debate the existence of Ambassador variants, for example, as we have been doing, but it would be even cooler if one of the original team was making a new CGI shot and said, "'This design we will show' or 'This design we won't show,'" and thus confirm if such a ship existed. That would be better than creating new shots without their input.
I often read comments to YouTube videos. One person suggested that the New Orleans is the 24th century analog of the Miranda class. Consider-the New Orleans has a fairly compact shape, and is dwarfed by the Nebula and Galaxy classes. It has a lot of firepower in the twin torpedo pods atop the saucer. The bottom of the engineering hull can mount either another torpedo pod, or a mission specific equipment module.
Only weakly so IMO. The "Main Selling Point" of the Miranda class is it's relatively large shuttlebays that allow for large-scale logistics support. In modern terms the Miranda would be a "pocket carrier"/"cruiser-destroyer" hybrid. The New Orleans on the other hand has limited to no shuttlebays so would be a multi-role "destroyer-cruiser" at best and potentially non-aviation capable "destroyer-cruiser". For this reason it's at best a successor to the Connie rather than the Miranda.
It wasn’t shuttlebays that made them the wingmen for the Defiant. New Orleans or Cheyennes or Sabers would have worked better.
No, that was dictated purely by wanting several ships of a "similar size". Therefore latter would have been the optimum choice there IMO. While the Defiant's size isn't entirely consistent, they're probably about 100-200m range which puts them in the same ball park as the Saber (and the Miranda length wise, but I think we agree that the Miranda shouldn't have been used in that role). On the other hand, most sources suggest that the New Orleans and Cheyenne are both a good deal larger (350-400m range).
I agree 100%. I have always loved the Ambassador class. Anytime someone can take that basic ship, and then "add their distinctiveness to" the design, I'm onboard. In addition to the Balmung, perhaps the Niagara, and even the Apollo class I've seen. And the Apollo has several versions of it as well, so that would give them lots of options.
Do a search for the Council Class Enterprise C by Jeff Robb. I can’t find his old GEC write up on the web…the abridged version is just at JoAT if I’m not mistaken. I’ve seen Apollo as a Nebula with Ambassador parts…but also as the Planet of the Titans short study model. Only Antares and the ‘Maru have more looks.
The New Orleans is roughly the same size as the Constitution, but with significantly more torpedo pods, if that's what the pens are supposed to be. (On the Cheyenne and others, those same pens are the nacelles). Trekyards made a fairly compelling arugement that the New Orleans is laid out a lot like an Intrepid. Based on that, I would say that they Galaxy-family of ships has a regular fleet with scouts, cruisers, etc., plus the Nebula and Galaxy which are huge compared to previous ships. In other words, going with Sternbach's assertion in the TNG tech manual that the 1701D is an Explorer, not a cruiser, that leaves room for the New Orleans, and later the Intrepid, to be cruisers of some kind.
I more or less agree. The Constitution is also broadly similarly configured. Agreed, however in this context, the Miranda is more accurately equivalent to the Nebula, which at least has something similar to the large, primary bay of the Galaxy-class, and possibly at least one bay in the aft "pillar". I'm not entirely sure that that is a useful distinction, as Age of Sail "cruising vessels" (from which the term originates), were the exploratory and long-range workhorse designs of their era. However, it's what we've got. Some sources suggest that the classification was introduced with the Excelsior as it's listed evac capacity is significantly greater relative to crew complement compared to the Connie, and the Ambassador would also have been an Explorer prior to the launch of the USS Galaxy, which dropped it down to a (heavy) cruiser.
Regarding the wrecks at Wolf 359.... We should consider what those different classes represented? What was their purposes?
To "job" to the lone Borg Cube to make the Borg seem threatening. The Fleet wasn't a normal structured fleet, it was a rag tag assembly of who you can find nearby on short notice.
Suggestions that I have come across: Springfield class is a larger science ship, that is, larger than an Oberth. Cheyenne is a lite explorer. I think that Challenger design might be a frigate. I don't know what to make of the Freedom class.
Could the Cheyenne be a scout or clipper ship? I’ve seen different versions of the New Orleans where the pods are torpedo bays and others where they’re deflectors or other sensor equipment. I like the deflectors myself. Like they’re mission-specific add-ons whereas I think torpedo bays would be integrated a la the “technology unchained.”
I once emailed Rob Legato about the original battle footage from "Emissary" that ultimately went unused. I asked him if there was ever a model built for the Apollo class U.S.S. Gage that was mentioned in a previous version of the script. Both he (and later Michael Okuda) mentioned that no new models were built for the scene, but that old models and model wreckage that was available were used, such as the damaged Reliant from TWOK. Apparently there was also old wreckage that he added the name "U.S.S. Tolstoy" to, but until that footage is ever seen, it will remain a mystery. The Renegade and the Thomas Paine (both listed as New Orleans class ships in the Encyclopedia) were mentioned in dialogue as being frigates, so the Kyushu was probably a frigate as well. Greg Jein obviously took cues from Franz Joseph's Starfleet Technical Manual when building the Freedom class Firebrand and the Niagara class Princeton, as the former ship resembles an updated Saladin/Hermes scout/destroyer, and the latter ship resembles the Federation dreadnought with three nacelles. I'm not saying that's what the ships are, but the similarities are unmistakable. The Cheyenne is also obviously an update to the Constellation class explorer, and the Springfield and Challenger classes are also probably science/exploration vessels as well. The Nebula is a capltal ship like the Galaxy class.
All of the 359 ships could use the refit treatment. I never liked the Saladin/Hermes Classes (they look like a head with a leg Frankenstein-stitched to it), and I feel similarly about the Freedom. Worse even, as it's too clunky in this "technology unchained" period. The closest I've seen something get to passable for me is Forbin's U.S.S. Preble. I like the organic deflector growth bit up top. It's more fluid and fits the period.
I've been doing some personal research on the W359 fleet recently, and it's been interesting. The only model that was used in both battle scenes was the proto-Nebula Melbourne. There doesn't seem to be any specific model or wreckage for the Tolstoy, and originally it wasn't named in dialogue (the Chekhov was to be named instead, but Shelby's line was altered because it sounded too much like a ship being named for Pavel Chekov ). Might be wrong of course. The Art of Star Trek claimed that the prototype Excelsiors and the Enterprise prototype from Phase II were used in the graveyard scene in BOBW, although that doesn't seem to actually be accurate. They were added into the graveyard stock footage in "Unification" along with several other models. AoST also has a destroyed shuttle model from the USS Liberator, which was built but apparently never filmed.